Me, as a person have gotten tired of NASCAR not giving credit where it is due. Mainly to the previous sponsor of the Cup Series and soon to be previous sponsor of the Busch Series. They refer to all Cup winners as NEXTEL Cup winners when this is not so and will do the same when Nationwide becomes the Busch sponsor next year. Since NEXTEL (next year SPRINT) became the sponsor of the cup series they refer to all champions as NEXTEL CUP Champions when not all were so. Just rubs me the wrong way I guess especially if I were at WINSTON. Whats your thoughts?
2007-10-29 04:36:54 · 9 answers · asked by mud_slinger8 2 in Sports ➔ Auto Racing ➔ NASCAR
You are absolutely right. If they won the Winston Cup, it should be referred to (forever!) as the Winston Cup winner...and the same for each sponsor. It also helps identify the era they won in. If they have multiple titles, they can refer to them as Cup titles (in general).
Go Jr.>>>>
2007-10-29 05:01:22 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
I could not agree more!!!!! Dale Earnhardt never won a NEXTEL Cup, he is 7 time Winston Cup Champion. The thought that just because you change the name of the title sponsor that all the trophies magically change the etching on them is crazy.
ABC, FOX, NBC et all need to remember that WInston made NASCAR the great sport it is today. All the money poured into it all those years ago really helped to make it thrive all over the country.
Now, the NEXTEL Cup will be the Sprint Cup after what 4 years or so....Does that mean that NEXTEL isn't as strong a sponsor as Winston was? Or is it that they aren't making the money they wanted off the deal? I say get a real sponsor who knows the value of the sport. Just like Winston did years ago.
2007-10-31 06:57:25 · answer #2 · answered by tow_tow_truck 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That is a great question and I am torn on it.. In one thought, I agree with them. Sprint-Nextel paid NASCAR a huge chunk of money to be the main sponsor of the cup series, and there is probably a clause in the contract that states the name WInston Cup can not be used when referring to past championships.
On the other thought, you are absolutely right. In the past, they didnt win the Sprint-Nextel Cup, they won the Winston Cup, and they should be referred to as past winners of the Winston Cup.
I guess it all depends on how the contract is worded with the Nextel contractual obligations.
2007-10-29 04:43:10 · answer #3 · answered by Harvick 29 Fan 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
it quite is an extremely debatable question. confident shorting a number of the races will make a great form of the communities no longer carry decrease back and cruise for the 1st 0.5 of the race. in essence making the race extra thrilling.they're going to ought to race harder to be able to win. it could additionally entice some extra followers, the biggest grievance I pay attention from casual followers is the races are to long. yet 500 mile races are part of NASCAR historic previous. a complicated middle fan is a traditionalist, and isn't all that prepared approximately replace. in an prolonged race it is not basically a conflict of velocity and potential yet certainly one of technique and persistence as properly. a genuine fan understands this and is merely as drawn to that conflict because of fact the conflict on the song. NASCAR has i'm particular debated this as properly. final week we observed this favourite hand. i think of it made that race plenty extra advantageous. So i'm impartial over this debate, i will see the two the advantages and the disadvantage of this debate. i'm a genuine fan, no longer an casual fan so i will watch regardless. real followers (no longer the casual fan) are NASCARS bread and butter. real followers are those spending money on their loved game. I additionally do no longer agree at the same time with your sponsor advertising and marketing remark. does not you get extra to you cash as a sponsor in a 500 mile race? your watching 3-4 hours of air time VS 2 hours of air time in a a hundred and fifty- 2 hundred mile race. extra is extra advantageous in that ingredient.
2016-10-14 08:04:33 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I actually understand what you mean. For me its the typical loss of a sense of History. Not comparing religion to racing (Although I unfortunately spend my Sundays watching NASCAR and not in church). But stuff like taking out references to God in historical documents and not wanting the 10 Commandments in Courtrooms as just as disturbing. Before Nextel, there was Winston. Like smoking or not, they are the fundamental roots of NASCAR just like the moonshine runners. Its History, its our past. If you dont like it, dont relive it, but taking away the name does not change the truth.
2007-10-29 04:46:25 · answer #5 · answered by MD 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you 100%
2007-10-29 13:05:35 · answer #6 · answered by Ed P 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree with you all !!! Ya know ? I don't feel so bad now,about
not getting a Dang refund on my ticket for Sunday's race. AT LEAST I realize now,they could be ripping me off,alot harder
THANKS YAW !!! lol
2007-10-29 12:33:02 · answer #7 · answered by Bow-legged Snake 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
good question.
2007-10-30 11:54:38 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
idk
2007-10-31 08:47:56 · answer #9 · answered by ? 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋