IRL CEO: "We need to blow up the IRL"

[mz2k]

Originally Posted by cptkablamo

I don't understand those who think that every Bernard statement is going to be the quick fix - it is going to take many, many steps to get there. This is one of them.

Because nothing that he has publicly announced has addressed the fundamental issue of the "on track" product. It's boring and predictable. The first step to addressing that core problem has not been taken.

And again, the rebranding of the sanctioning body has nothing to do with chassis or engines or tv. It's a business thing. A market positioning thing. And something that I agree with.

It's cosmetic. It doesn't change the nature of the series. It may be quick, but it's not even a fix. Most businesses will reposition themselves by altering some basic essense of their business- a product, service, or focus on a market. The rebranding is just a part of that strategy.

I see none of those with the IRL- other than a name change.

The IRL- now doing business as (fill in the blank).

Pathetic.

I agree completely that turning this thing round is important and if it is a spec chassis, even with differing engine combinations will drive another nail into the coffin.

It's not about the chassis or engines (though the IRL definitely could use a better looking car). It's about the competition on the track, or lack thereof. CCWS was getting very stale with the NH/Bourdais dominance and the Lola. And while the Panoz didn't change the championship outcome, it did allow three different teams to win races. It definitely made for a more interesting season.

The last few years have been dull and maybe the wrong side came out of this on top - even at the death of CCWS.

On this I agree. Internal politics aside, CCWS understood that lack of competition on the track made for a unsellable product. I liked the fact that their focus on the Panoz development (a spec chassis) was on increasing competition on the track- from aerodynamics to economics.

It wasn't perfect, but I don't think any top level professional series has gone that route before.

But they do have some things going for them. They have a title sponsor. They have a TV package that has potential. They obviously have committed teams - otherwise why would have they stuck around?

Subsidies- that's why they stick around. They don't really race for the purses, because they're still guaranteed money for racing full time.

That and a shot at the Indy 500 purse, which still pays out a lot of money.

Otherwise, why would they stay and be continually beaten by Penske and Ganassi?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by mz2k

It's not about the chassis or engines (though the IRL definitely could use a better looking car). It's about the competition on the track, or lack thereof. CCWS was getting very stale with the NH/Bourdais dominance and the Lola. And while the Panoz didn't change the championship outcome, it did allow three different teams to win races. It definitely made for a more interesting season.

I think the chassis and engine have a lot to do with it and makes for a boring series. As you your self mentioned NH/Bourdais. One reason CCWS switched to the DP01 was the need for a new chassis as the Lola B03-00, which was an upgrade to the B02-00, was getting long in the tooth. The DP01 allowed for different teams to win initially but if CCWS had prevailed it would only have been a matter of time until it to went the way of a spec series.

What made CART interesting from my point of view and others who followed it at the time, was the variety of chassis/engine/tyre combinations. The Reynard did dominate for a while, particularly with the Honda engine but other chassis and engines had dominted before, namely March and Lola, Cosworth and Ilmor and Lola didmake a comeback. This all demonstrates the fluidity of open wheel racing back then as opposed to what has now become a stagnant spec series.

[mz2k]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I think the chassis and engine have a lot to do with it and makes for a boring series. As you your self mentioned NH/Bourdais. One reason CCWS switched to the DP01 was the need for a new chassis as the Lola B03-00, which was an upgrade to the B02-00, was getting long in the tooth. The DP01 allowed for different teams to win initially but if CCWS had prevailed it would only have been a matter of time until it to went the way of a spec series.

The chassis, whether spec or multiple makes, is just a means to an end. IMO, it's all about whether or not it makes for an interesting on-track product. If you recall, Forsythe and RuSport gave NH a lot of competition with the Lola- they just couldn't win enough to prevent NH and Bourdais from winning the championships.

I don't believe CCWS developed the Panoz simply because the Lola was getting old. One big factor was that the Lola was simply too expensive for the majority of teams to run- let alone be competitive. Cost of ownership and competition drove the requirements. If the Lola had been cost effective and allowed more teams to win, there wouldn't have been a reason to change.

Ironically, the IRL finds itself in the same position. But it's stuck with the "not invented here" syndrome, so solutions to the very problems they're trying to solve aren't even considered.

While I think the current Dallara is about the ugliest looking open wheel racecar this side of Formula 1, I'm with JagTech if his ideas for the Dallara can make the racing cost-effective and break the Penske/Ganassi stranglehold. Because in the end, that's what I liked about CART. There were always teams that can win and rise up to become the top dogs- until another team came around. Sure, the different chassis, engines, and tires made it interesting. But it was always about having different teams and drivers up front.

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by mz2k

The chassis, whether spec or multiple makes, is just a means to an end. IMO, it's all about whether or not it makes for an interesting on-track product. If you recall, Forsythe and RuSport gave NH a lot of competition with the Lola- they just couldn't win enough to prevent NH and Bourdais from winning the championships.

I don't believe CCWS developed the Panoz simply because the Lola was getting old. One big factor was that the Lola was simply too expensive for the majority of teams to run- let alone be competitive. Cost of ownership and competition drove the requirements. If the Lola had been cost effective and allowed more teams to win, there wouldn't have been a reason to change.

Ironically, the IRL finds itself in the same position. But it's stuck with the "not invented here" syndrome, so solutions to the very problems they're trying to solve aren't even considered.

While I think the current Dallara is about the ugliest looking open wheel racecar this side of Formula 1, I'm with JagTech if his ideas for the Dallara can make the racing cost-effective and break the Penske/Ganassi stranglehold. Because in the end, that's what I liked about CART. There were always teams that can win and rise up to become the top dogs- until another team came around. Sure, the different chassis, engines, and tires made it interesting. But it was always about having different teams and drivers up front.

Obviously a spec chassis or multiple makes are just a means to an end; racing. I personally don't think a spec chassis does make for an interesting on-track product. The very fact there are proposals for a new Indy Car chassis and a committee setup to look into the various proposals, suggests the currant package isn't doing its job.

As for spec series, the exceptions are the lower formulae like GP2, F2, F3 etc. but these are feeder series and their emphasis is entirely different from that of F1 or Indy Car; apart from them I can't think of a major open wheel spec series that's been successful and has continued to be successful. It's therefore not surprising the IRL finds itself in the same position as CCWS did.

Granted the Lola was expensive but it was getting old. Basically no development had been done on it since the B02-00 was upgraded to the B03-00, which ran from 2003-06. Again, as you point out, the IRL is in a similar position with an ageing chassis.

I've read JagTech's proposal, regarding the Dallara chassis and I too think it's an excellent idea, partly because it makes for cost-effective racing and partly because it gets rid of the spec aspect.

Yes, it is about having different teams and drivers up front but it's those different combinations of driver chassis, engine and tyre, which generate long term interest just like F1.

[JagtechOhio]

mz and bjohn, thanks for the kind words.

With non-spec rules, a guy could buy an old Dallara and build a turbo 4 cyl version to race now. Or the Falcon, how about rolling that out with a GM 4 cyl in it?

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by JagtechOhio

mz and bjohn, thanks for the kind words.

With non-spec rules, a guy could buy an old Dallara and build a turbo 4 cyl version to race now. Or the Falcon, how about rolling that out with a GM 4 cyl in it?

Remember I have read your proposal and posted my thoughts about it on this forum on the new chassis thread. I still think it's an excellent idea and deals with two major issues faced by the IRL, or what ever it's now called, very effectively; affordable racing and an end to spec racing.

[JagtechOhio]

Remembered, and much appreciated.

I think we will both be very dissatisfied when the two most likely scenarios come to pass in July:

Specs for an engine that will not exist until 2012 at the earliest

Specs for a chassis that prevents competition from alternate constructors and makes the current cars unsuitable for continued use.

[bjohnsonsmith]

In the last Gordon Kirby article, you posted, Roger Penske said he was quite happy to keep the Dallara as is, until 2013. He would be.

[gomick]

New chassis - hope its on the grid in 2011...

[cptkablamo]

I too like your chassis/engine ideas, Jagtech and certainly have not been arguing against that. I believe spec racing to be unsustainable and an organic rotation of cars is needed...lets hope for a good solution from the ICONIC group and back room changes with the gusto to make the product competitive in the market in which it exists

[JagtechOhio]

Cheers Cap'n,

gusto, that's a good one. Reminds me of the #55 "Schlitz Gusto" of one Josele Garza.

[Bob Riebe]

Read:
http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/nascar...medium=twitter

[bjohnsonsmith]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Read:
http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/nascar...medium=twitter

I had no idea of the role NASCAR played in helping the IRL. That was a fascinating read. Thanks.

[Bob Riebe]

Originally Posted by bjohnsonsmith

I had no idea of the role NASCAR played in helping the IRL. That was a fascinating read. Thanks.

Hinton is and always has been a NASCAR hack, but this does tell things those from either camp do not like to hear.

Regardless of bias, this does give an interesting different view.

[Canada ALMS fan]

Originally Posted by Bob Riebe

Read:
http://sports.espn.go.com/rpm/nascar...medium=twitter

Thanks for the link Bob. That was a great (but depressing) read. I usually give you a hard time for missing the good old days of sportscars but when it comes to open wheel I feel your pain.
I hope I never run into Tony George, it would be the end of my life as a free man.