I think the top 35 rule stinks! The fastest 43 cars should race. Period. We were told that the top 35 rule would insure that the top (most popular) drivers and the sport's committed sponsors would be at the track racing. We were told that they needed the protection. I have a question: haven't NAPA and UPS been committed high profile sponsors? Who are bigger names: Dale Jarrett and Michael Waltrip... or J.J. Yeley and David Stremme? My point is not that D.J or Mikey "deserve" to race every race , but that they do deserve to race when they out qualify seven or eight of the "top 35" teams. The top 35 rule has outlived it's usefullness. If Gordon or Jr. or anybody else fails to qualify, then so be it.
Qualifying would be much more dramatic if it actually meant something. Let's begin to take this sport back in the direction of being a sport. Am I wrong?
2007-05-16 08:48:08 · 9 answers · asked by jamesedge 2 in Sports ➔ Auto Racing ➔ NASCAR
I despise the Top 35 rule. I don't think you will find a fan FOR the top 35 rule. I'll take a shot at why there is a Top 35 rule other than sponsor, popular driver. Look at it from the Daytona 500. The Top 35 rule puts the Top 35 teams at the end of the previous year into the race. This year there were 61 teams that attempted to qualify for the race but only around 48-50 actual attempting to run full time teams. Now I realize Daytona has a different qualifying system but without the Top 35 rule we could have seen 11 teams that had no intention of running the full season in the race. I hate the Top 35 rule but there was my very less than half hearted attempt at an agrument for the stupid rule.
2007-05-16 12:04:04 · answer #1 · answered by Donny H 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you 100%... but I'll go ahead and argue for the rule...
Basically if you are a fan of Dale Jr. or Gordon, Smoke, Johnson, Harvick, any of the top drivers, you want to see your guy race! Could you imagine what would happen if Jr. missed a race?! Forget throwing beer cans, there would be a full on riot!
2007-05-16 15:56:14 · answer #2 · answered by shaggy 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I agree...the top 35 rule stinks.
Basically, Nascar caved when sponsors started whining that they pay top dollar and there is a chance their team may not make it into a race.
2007-05-16 16:00:06 · answer #3 · answered by az 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I can't give you one good reason for the top 35 rule. I'm tired of seeing good race teams go home just because it's their first year.
2007-05-16 18:35:51 · answer #4 · answered by Nc Jay 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you whole heartily. If you don't qualify go home. The way it is now why they should the top 35 put extra miles on their car when they don't have to.
2007-05-19 13:35:28 · answer #5 · answered by sandy h 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
the only arguement for it is that it gives the cars with no chance at a championship a reason to keep fighting in the race,
that said i think its stupid, your making this weeks race next weeks qualifying session,
nobody should be locked in, like EVERY OTHER FORM OF RACING!!!!!!!!
2007-05-16 16:03:17 · answer #6 · answered by eyesinthedrk 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You make a valid point, my only objection is the team as a whole, those teams that work their butts off week after week should also be rewarded for their diligence by being ensured their top 35 position.
It's a tough call.
2007-05-16 15:58:40 · answer #7 · answered by shortnstoudt 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
You are right race in on time only !!!!
2007-05-16 16:18:43 · answer #8 · answered by David G, Jeff Gordon Rules !!!!! 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
cant give you an argument for it...should race for the race....
2007-05-16 15:51:23 · answer #9 · answered by michiedem 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋