Category: my thoughts on

By David G. Firestone

Streaming sports on app seems like a great idea. The capacity to watch the game on a phone, tablet, or computer when you are not at home for whatever reason should be a great thing. Over the last few weeks, I watched a few events via streaming, and I discovered that Fox Sports found a great way to fuck this up.

Whoever is in charge of the app streaming division at Fox Sports should be fired. After streaming three different events, two races, and the Super Bowl, I’ve realized that whoever is in charge over at Fox Sports either doesn’t understand the basics of advertising revenue, or if they do, they don’t care.

The first race I watched was the Rolex 24. I watched all 24 hours. Fox Sports Go had a setup where if you had a streaming service with Fox Sports, you could watch the whole race. Now this seems like a good idea, but after midnight, the commercials shifted to something called “Fox Sports Racing” which is little more than a Velocity rip off. It’s a channel that has auto racing, and car customization shows. I’m not going to watch it, but there are plenty of car guy and gals who might like to watch it. Here’s the problem: IT’S NOT AVAILABLE IN THE UNITED STATES!

Could someone please explain to me why in the world I had to sit through commercials for a product I can’t buy? Again, it isn’t my thing, but I would bet that there are people who would. To have to watch 3 or 4 of these promos every commercial break was enraging. It’s one thing to show commercials for stuff I don’t want, but can buy, but to force me to watch commercials for something I can’t buy is insulting. The thing is, as bad as this was, this wasn’t the worst.

Next, I watched the Super Bowl in its entirety on the NFL Mobile app. Now I get that while there are plenty of national commercials, but if you are going to put something in place of them on an app, could you pick more than two TV show promos? Every commercial break there was one promo for Empire, or 24. Apparently Fox doesn’t have any other television shows that they felt should be promoted during the biggest television show of the year. Watching the same two promos was enraging. Rather than alternating the two, Fox would play the Empire one over, and over, occasionally replacing it with the 24 promo. This was actually not as bad as what happened next.

On the way home on Amtrak, I was attempting to watch the NHRA Winternationals, and I had to turn it off. The Fox Sports Go app should be an easy thing to do. Just show the national telecast, with local commercials. This generates ad revenue, and keeps sponsors happy. Leave it to Fox to mess this up in the most idiotic way possible. Instead of showing said commercials, for whatever reason, the app would replace them with local Fox promos.

Again, why would you screw over advertisers in order to promote local programming? This makes no sense, it screws over and enrages sponsors, and fans hate it. It’s so nonsensical, it’s mind boggling! Who at Fox thought this was a good idea? Why was this approved? If the plan was to destroy the Fox Sports Go app, then it’s going well. I’m NEVER watching any Fox Sports programming on the Fox Sports Go app again EVER! I hope that whoever is in charge over at Fox Sports gets fired.

By David G. Firestone

For the last week, I’ve been in Tucson, Arizona. I go down there for a week to visit my family. I enjoy the trip down there, but I don’t travel much aside from that. For me, traveling is fun once in a while, but on a regular basis, it’s not for me.

Anyone who knows me knows that I traveled a lot when I was younger. While I did enjoy it, I don’t like sleeping somewhere that I’m not used to. My parents have a nice condo in Tucson, and it has a really nice bed, but I’m so used to The Hauler back in Evanston, that it’s hard for me to sleep. I’m also not used to giving up my night owl tendencies, since my job usually has me clocking out at midnight. I love my shifts at work, so clocking out late doesn’t bother me.

I also detest flying. I HATE FLYING! Flying is my big fear in life, and since September 11, everything good about flying has gone away. That is why I prefer Amtrak for traveling. All the stuff that is awful about flying doesn’t exist on Amtrak. The seats are big, and they are roomy. There are no restrictions on when you can use electronics, or go to the bathroom. You can bring your own food, and they serve meals. But my favorite part is the fact that the trip is much more relaxed, and you get to see a lot of cool stuff on your trip.

I take the Texas Eagle, which travels from Chicago to Los Angeles, and has a number of stops. You see a lot of rural areas, and a lot of stuff that you would never see flying. I made a video of part of my journey from Chi-Town to Tucson, and you can see it below.

Coming home from traveling is one of my favorite parts, because I can get back to my home, and see Alejandro, the official mascot and paint scheme consultant of The Driver Suit Blog. I’ll discuss my trip further over the next couple of weeks. The project that I was worried about actually happened, and I promise that racing fans will love it! Everything is back to normal, in terms of The Driver Suit Blog.

By David G. Firestone

Last week, NASCAR announced that effective in 2017, races would have a new format. Instead of just running a 400 or 500 mile race, the new format states that:

• Races will now consist of three stages, with championship implications in each stage.

• The top-10 finishers of the first two stages will be awarded additional championship points.

• The winner of the first two stages of each race will receive one playoff point, and the race winner will receive five playoff points. Each playoff point will be added to his or her reset total following race No. 26, if that competitor makes the playoffs.

• All playoff points will carry through to the end of the third round of the playoffs (Round of 8), with the Championship 4 racing straight-up at Homestead-Miami Speedway for the title.

• Championship points following the first two stages will be awarded on a descending scale, with the stage winner receiving 10 points, second receiving 9 points, and so on.

• The race winner following the final stage will now receive 40 points, second-place will receive 35, third-place 34, fourth-place 33, and so on.

This is designed to make the races more exciting, and instead of just one race, there are three races in one event. Obviously, old school fans aren’t too happy about this, but let’s be honest, the old way wasn’t working. Race attendance and television ratings are down across the board. What that tells me, and tells most people, is that the on-track product is stale. As I said with the Days of Our Lives Vs. Megyn Kelly column, if the old format was working, NASCAR would go out of their way to defend it. NASCAR is a multi-national, multi-billion dollar corporation. They don’t have to lose money to make you happy.

I’m going to reserve my judgment on the changes themselves until midway through the racing season. I want to see the changes on track, and how the racing is, and then make my decision. This could be a boost that NASCAR needs.

Also this week, I’m going to Tucson for my annual visit. I leave on Friday, and I will return after a week. For that week, I will have a Friday Feature, and a Throwback Thursday, but My Thoughts On, the Tracker, and Paint Scheme Grades will skip a week. I may have a project for The Driver Suit Blog again, but I’m not 100% sure. I hope this works. I’ll see you when I get home.

By David G. Firestone

So in honor of the inauguration, and politics being the topic of discussion, I felt the need to do something, but I didn’t want to do anything political. I’m not political, but I am an autograph collector. I’ve been noticing that the quality of signatures have gone downhill, and I had an idea. I’m going to grade every president on how their signature looks. It’s a handwriting grade.

1. George Washington-The first of what is going to be a trend here, signatures that don’t look like the name of the person signing them. If I showed you this signature, and I didn’t tell you who it was, you would have no idea what you were looking at. I can kind of make out Washington, but it could be several other things. I don’t see “George” but I do see a “G.” I give it a D-.

2. John Adams-It’s a great signature, the handwriting looks good, and I can easily tell who signed this. I give it an A.

3. Thomas Jefferson-The man who wrote the Declaration of Independence apparently didn’t feel the need to add the “omas” in Thomas Jefferson. The signature reads “TH Jefferson.” The argument that the H was a middle initial isn’t valid, since Jefferson didn’t have one. Still the Jefferson is easy to make out, and it’s not that terrible, so I’ll give it a B-

4. James Madison-Ok, I can see that it’s James Madison. The “mes” looks like one scribble. Madison looks really good. All in all, it’s a decent signature. B+

5. James Monroe-Everything that I said about James Madison also applies here. B+

6. John Quincy Adams-Is that JQ Adams, or JJ Adams? It’s hard to tell. The Adams looks decent, but the penmanship does need some work. I’ll give it a B.

7. Andrew Jackson-Can I ask a question? Why do people feel the need to underline their signatures? It serves no purpose, adds an extra step, and it never looks good. Andrew Jackson has a great signature, but I don’t like the underline. It takes an A signature down to a B+

8. Martin Van Buren-Really? M. Van Buren? Is Martin too hard of a word to write? I get if this was a signature used occasionally, but I’ve been able to find no evidence that he ever signed his name as Martin.

9. William Henry Harrison-The penmanship is really good here, but, again, why would you not write “William Henry?”  Why just watch WH?  I would like to give this signature a higher grade, but our shortest-reigning President gets a C-

10. John Tyler-Why in the world are the J and the O below the rest of the signature? It looks really odd. The signature itself isn’t terrible, but the odd placement of the first two letters gives it a weird look. I’ll give it a B-

11. James K Polk-Huh? What am I looking at here? Like George Washington, if I didn’t tell you who this is, you wouldn’t be able to figure it out. I know that the letter in the middle is supposed to be a K but nobody would be able to identify that as a K. It’s an F signature for sure.

12. Zachary Taylor-Another thing that annoys me is a signature where two names become one word. Taylor signed his name while never taking the pen off the page. It looks odd though. It’s not terrible, but it looks odd. B+

13. Millard Filmore-You can tell who it is, but I’m a little put off by the fact that the FI sort of looks like a swastika. Yes I’m aware the swastika didn’t become the official symbol of the Nazi Party until 1920, but it still looks odd. Still it’s not terrible, so I’ll give it a B

14. Franklin Pierce-A little hard to make out with some pointless flourish on the F and E will take a B scheme down to a C+.

15. James Buchanan-One of my all time favorite presidential signatures. It has a nice look, you can tell who signed it, and every letter is easy to see. I give it an A.

16. Abraham Lincoln-It’s a good signature, every letter is clear, and it looks good. Another A scheme.

17. Andrew Johnson-While every letter is clear, and you can tell who signed it, the penmanship could use a little work. It’s still a solid A- signature though.

18. Ulysses S Grant-Let’s take every thing that annoys me about signatures, unreadable, you can’t tell who wrote it, can’t write the whole name, pointless flourish, and underlining and compress them in to one signature, and you have a signature worth an F.

19. Rutherford B Hayes-R.B. Hayes. While you can see every letter, it’s a little difficult to tell who signed it, since the R and the B look a little similar. Points are also deducted for not writing Rutherford, choosing instead to write simply R. All things considered, it’s worth a C-

20. James A Garfield-I don’t like the fact that the A and G are connected. The signature is good but those two little details take it from an A to a A-.

21. Chester A Arthur-Pointless flourish and a little too hard to read. It’s an A- scheme.

22/24. Grover Cleveland-While he did write every letter in his name, it’s a little hard to make out those letters. You can tell who it is, but the penmanship needs work. I’ll give it B+

23. Benjamin Harrison-I can make out the Harrison fine, but I have a lot of trouble with the Benjamin, since it doesn’t look like it says Benjamin. The penmanship needs work too. I’ll give it a C-

25. William McKinley-Why can’t people sign their whole first name? Why is that so hard of a concept? Add to that the fact that the last name would be unreadable if you didn’t know who had signed this, and you have an F signature for sure.

26. Theodore Roosevelt-He did write his whole name, but it’s such a jumbled mess that you can’t really tell the name. I can’t tell what the last letters are supposed to be. It’s not a good signature at all. F

27. William H Taft-Virtually unreadable is all that needs to be said here. It’s an F signature, and I’m being kind.

28. Woodrow Wilson-It’s a little hard to read, and while he does write every letter in his name, the penmanship does need a little work. I also don’t like the line on the N. I’ll give it a C+

29. Warren Harding-While it is technically possible to figure out who signed this, It takes some work, and since the penmanship is terrible, that makes it more difficult. While he does sign every letter in is name, its not easy to read. It’s a D+ graded signature.

30. Calvin Coolidge-While I can tell that there are two C’s, the rest of the signature is unreadable. The flourish on the E is annoying, and I give the signature a D+

31. Herbert Hoover-While he does write every letter in his name, it is a little hard to read, and the fact that it’s one word, with the cross of the T leading into the H is a little off-putting. The letters at the end of the name are a little jumbled as well. I’ll give it a C+.

32. Franklin D Roosevelt-The letters are all there, and it’s easy to read. My thing is with the R. Is that an R by itself, or is that an D and an R? It’s hard to tell. I’ts an B+ scheme.

33. Harry S Truman-While he does write every letter in his name, it’s not very readable, and the fact that it’s all one line is annoying me. I’ll give it a B-

34. Dwight D Eisenhower-This is an odd one, because for some reason Dwight and Eisenhower are two separate lines, but the end of Dwight and Eisenhower are connected. He does write every letter in his name, and it’s easy to see who wrote it, but the spacing is odd, and I’ll give it an A-

35. John F Kennedy-It’s next to impossible to figure out who signed this. I can kind of make out John, but Kennedy is next to impossible. Add to that odd spacing, and you have an F scheme for sure.

36. Lyndon B Johnson-Is that a signature or a cardiogram? It’s kind of hard to tell. It’s all one line, with scribbles for letters. I can’t tell who wrote this at all. I’ll give it an F.

37. Richard M Nixon-While the penmanship does need work, the letters are all there, it’s pretty easy to read, and it’s easy to read. No flourish, or underlining, and you have an A signature.

38. Gerald R Ford-It’s a little hard to read, but the letters are all there, and you can tell who wrote it. I’m a little confused by the left-to-right upward slant of the signature. It just looks odd. It’s worth a B.

39. Jimmy Carter-All the letters are there, it’s easy to read, the penmanship is good, the one thing that I find odd is how much higher the cross in the J is above the rest of the letter. Still, all things considered it’s worth an A.

40. Ronald Reagan-What I like about this signature is that the loops in the R’s remind me of Mickey Mantle’s signature. All the letters are there, and it’s easy to read. I give it an A.

41. George H.W. Bush-Unreadable, with a left-to-right upward slant. Another example of a signature that you can’t tell who signed it unless someone else tells you. I give it an F.

42. Bill Clinton-Yes, he wrote every letter in his name, and you can tell who wrote it, but the penmanship is awful, and both names are one word. I give it a C-

43. George W Bush-How can anyone tell that is supposed to spell George W Bush? It looks like a scribble. It’s unreadable, has a bad slant, and is all in all an F signature.

44. Barack Obama-I guess you could tell that is the signature of Barack Obama, because of the B and the O. The rounding of the B is odd, and the scribbles in “arack bama” aren’t good, so I’ll give it a C.

45.Donald Trump-Another example of “signature or cardiogram?” This one is much worse, because there is no way anyone could tell who signed it by looking at it. I’ll give it an F.

By David G. Firestone

I’ve been following Carl Edwards’ retirement story since in broke on Tuesday. I knew I wanted to write about it, but as I was thinking, I realized that I had to say something to someone else. So I would like to take this opportunity to apologize to Brian Scott for what I said back in December.

For those who don’t remember, I slammed Brian Scott for walking away from his racing career to focus on “the next phase of his career.” I made my feelings known that I thought it wasn’t a great decision, and that he is making a serious mistake. After what happened with Carl Edwards, I realized how wrong he really was, and I felt bad for saying that. I realized that both Carl and Brian put a lot of thought into these decisions, they took what was the best decision, not just for them but their families. It seemed like a rash decision at the time, but with hindsight , it was the right decision. I wish them both the best.

The next item is the new blog format for The Driver Suit Blog. I thought the old format would work well, but what has been happening is that when I do paint schemes on different days, it changes the fonts. I hated the way it looked, and I tried everything to fix it. Seeing that the best option would be to change the entire layout, I made that decision. There are still some issues, but I’ll work around it.

Also, for the last bit this week, the San Diego Chargers became the LA Chargers. As such, they introduced a logo for the move, which didn’t go over too well. So since everyone else was having fun with their logo, I might as well too. Check it out.

By David G. Firestone

I hate internet outrage! I don’t mind when the outrage is about a serious matter, but when the outrage is about something that doesn’t matter at all, it’s annoying as all hell! I read something earlier this week, and I heard the reaction surrounding it, and it boggles my mind on so many levels.

NBC is considering canceling Days Of Our Lives, which has been on since 1965 for a news show starring Megyn Kelly. For some reason, people are angry about this. Let me explain something to you who are mad: NBC doesn’t have to lose money to make you happy. The soap opera is a thing of the past, just like milkmen, and the evening newspaper. NBC is a for profit company, and if a show isn’t profitable, it goes away. If Days of Our Lives was as popular as people claim, wouldn’t NBC make every attempt to keep it on the air?

The television market is a constantly evolving market. Obviously the ratings matter. I’m amazed at people who think that what is profitable and what the market is showing to be profitable doesn’t matter because it’s not what they want. I’m sorry the world doesn’t work the way you want it to. Entertainment and technology are going to progress the way they are, and if you aren’t happy, then that’s too bad. Also, it’s not impossible that a cable channel could pick the series up. Stay tuned.

By David G. Firestone

2017 is upon us. We all celebrated New Years in our own way. I celebrated my 35^th birthday yesterday. I don’t make resolutions for myself, but I’m going to make some for The Driver Suit Blog.

*Politics is banned forever from The Driver Suit Blog. You come here to get away from the worries, and I will help you as I can.

*I will not make any major changes to the Driver Suit Blog formula. Everything will be the same.

*For current events, I will try to be as neutral as I possibly can.

*As promised, I will have a few Tailgating Time recipes for this year.

*I’m also going to work on a few videos as Friday Features. For some subjects, it’s easier to express certain things with a video than it can through text.

*If you send me an email, I will respond. I wasn’t as good as I could have been last year, you guys and gals rule, and I love looking up stuff for you!

*As always, I’m going to keep trying new projects, some for The Driver Suit Blog, some for my own enjoyment.

*Finally, as always, all are welcome here, no questions asked.

I wish you all the best 2017!

By David G. Firestone

Big news yesterday, as not only was the new name for what was the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series was revealed, but NASCAR itself has a new logo. I can’t say I’m all that shocked about either, but I will say it did take NASCAR a lot longer than I thought it would to come up with a new logo.

Let’s discuss NASCAR’s new logo. The old setup was good, but it was designed in 1976, and really needed an update. It’s a much more minimalist logo, with a different font, and the color bar is much shorter. I have to say…I like it. The font looks much better, and while I liked the old color bar setup, this new design looks really good. It works well. I give it an A.

Now the new name…the “Monster Energy NASCAR Cup Series.” I’m kind of surprised with that. It doesn’t roll of the tongue. It sounds almost like the name was a placeholder for something better. I thought they would have gone with the “NASCAR Monster Energy Series.” Traditionalists refer to it as the Cup series, and there had been discussions about removing the Cup from the name. In this case…it was the wrong move.

Also, why isn’t NASCAR the first word in the series title? Every series in NASCAR is the NASCAR X Series. In this case, Monster Energy is the first word in the title. Granted there is the Verizon IndyCar Series, but I’ve always thought it should be sanctioning body then sponsor. It sounds better, and works better.

Is the logo in the video the new series logo? Is the series logo going to be a black rectangle with the logo seen in the video? Is NASCAR moving away from the oval designs of the Xfinity Series, and Camping World Truck Series? If so, that would mark a return to the old Winston Cup logo patch design. This could work if the logo isn’t too big. But if the black rectangle is the new logo, it would have to be a little bigger for detail. This could work, or it could be disaster. I’ll reserve my judgment.

I also have to give NASCAR and Monster Energy credit for ruining what could have been a great press conference. NASCAR and Monster Energy held a massive press conference to reveal that a deal had been signed, but didn’t give any details on the series name or logo. Then, they basically used Facebook and Twitter to release a video declaring the new series name. It should have been reversed. They should have released a press release stating that a deal had been signed, and had the huge press conference to reveal the new series name and new NASCAR logo. I did not think they would mess this up as badly as they did.

We just can’t skip over this press conference thing. This should be the biggest moment of the off-season, and instead, it amounted to a little more than a press conference. The series could have had a great name and logo, but instead it has a terrible name, and a mediocre logo. NASCAR had so much opportunity to make this announcement great, but they screwed it up in every way possible. The new NASCAR logo is the only good thing about this. The ball was really dropped today. I can only hope that going forward, mistakes will be fixed.

By David G. Firestone

As predicted, it was announced today that Monster Energy will be the new series sponsor for what was the NASCAR Sprint Cup Series. This had been predicted, and I watched the press conference. I took a couple things away from that conference.

*NASCAR is getting “significantly less” money for the sponsorship from Monster than they did from Sprint. This doesn’t come as a shock to me due to the fact that within the last 10 years, TV ratings, and race attendance are down. Obviously this had an effect on the overall deal, and Monster had the best deal for the amount of ideas for the price.

*Monster has made it clear that they will be more aggressive with marketing. This is not a minor issue, for the reason above. Monster wants to “bring more younger viewers into the sport, while not alienating the current fan base.” I’m paraphrasing, but that is a good approach. Spring didn’t seem to be as interested in marketing as they should have been, and the sport suffered as a result.

*Looking at their current sponsorships and their current attitude, Monster is a motorsports oriented sponsor. Between Formula 1, Kurt Busch, World Rally Cross, and now NASCAR, it’s clear that Monster was the best choice.

*I have to wonder how this will affect current sponsorships. One guarantee a series sponsor has is that it automatically becomes the only company that can sponsor cars in their industry. Monster could be in any number of industries. Monster Energy could be classified as being in the energy drink, soda, or beverage industry. If it is in the energy drink category, that would be the best thing, because that would mean that other soda and beer companies wouldn’t have any issues. If it is in the soda category, that could affect Hendrick Motorsports, who has deals with Pepsi, and BK Racing, who has deals with Dr. Pepper/7Up. If it is in the beverage industry, that could make it very difficult for teams to find new sponsors.

*While current sponsors will probably get grandfathered in by the current deal, there is no guarantee that the sponsorships will remain in place. Something could happen that would violate an agreement, and then certain sponsors will get banned. This isn’t an unreasonable thing to worry about. Under Nextel/Sprint, Verizon and AT&T were both banned from sponsoring cars in the premier series.

*and finally, I didn’t realize that Monster Energy was an independent company, that has some stock owned by Coca Cola. I had thought that Coca Cola had purchased Monster a few ears ago.

It should also be noted that the series name and logo are still being worked on, so as soon as those get revealed, I will discuss them at length.

UPDATE: Since Monster Energy is in the Energy Drink category, only current energy drink manufacturers will be impacted. The only major sponsor this affects is 5-Hour Energy, and there is some debate over whether they are an energy drink or energy shot, which could affect their sponsorship of future cars.

 

By David G. Firestone

Before I finish for the year, I wanted to take some time and discuss a few things in the NASCAR world that are changing. Some are good, others are not. But all of them are going to impact the 2017 NASCAR season.

First is the big news that there are new rules for Cup drivers in the Xfinity and Truck Series. The two most important new rules are:

*Drivers with more than five years of full-time premier series experience will be ineligible to compete in the final eight races in each series, as well as the Dash 4 Cash races in the NASCAR XFINITY Series. The final eight races are comprised of the regular season finale and the entirety of the Chase in each series.

*Starting next season, premier series drivers with more than five years of full-time experience will be eligible to compete in a maximum of 10 races in the XFINITY Series and seven races in the NASCAR Camping World Truck Series.

I don’t think that the rules go far enough. I am a fan of the idea that the minor leagues of racing should only be used for driver development and/or driver injury rehabilitation. That is how every other sport in the history of ever has used their minor leagues. In my mind, full-time Cup drivers shouldn’t be allowed to compete in the Xfinity or Truck series, unless they have missed some races due to injury and want to judge if they are capable of running a full Cup race, or they lose their ride, and aren’t competing in the Cup series anymore.

Please don’t try to tell me that the Xfinity and Truck races benefit from “star power” of the Cup drivers. That argument makes zero sense whatsoever, because no other sports league does that with their stars. Did the NHL send Wayne Gretzky to the minors to boost their star power? Did the NBA send LeBron James to the D-league? Did the MLB send Mickey Mantle to the minors to boost star power? The answer is no. Mantle and Gretzky did spend time in the minors, but that was early in their careers, where their talents were obvious but they needed some more polish before debuting in the major leagues.

I also got some news last week that proves something I have been saying for some time. Greg Biffle was released from Roush Racing due to a lack of sponsorship. Biffle finished 23^rd in the standings, and was the third best of the Roush drivers, with Trevor Bayne finishing 22^nd, and Ricky Stenhouse finishing 21^st. Roush Fenway Racing has gone from super team to super joke in the last decade. I hate to say I told you so, but I told you so.

Why Jack Roush refuses to use the free agency system for his team is perplexing. Roush exclusively uses his developmental program for his Cup teams, despite all evidence that in recent years, it hasn’t worked well. Even teams like Richard Chldress Racing, and Joe Gibbs Racing, who were also using their developmental programs for their Cup talent figured out quickly that the free agent market is a great way to boost their teams. Roush seems to be fixated on that, despite that in the last 10 years, it has gotten them nowhere.

Yes, it did work with Carl Edwards, Matt Kenseth, and Greg Biffle, but those guys were very talented drivers who would have thrived no matter where they ran. While Ricky Stenhouse Jr., and Trevor Bayne are talented drivers, they aren’t on the level of Edwards, Kenseth, or Biffle. That’s not taking anything away from them. You need to be a talented driver to race your way into the Cup Series. Hell, Ricky Stenhouse Jr. is a two-time Xfinity Champion, but when was the last time a driver was Xfinity Series Champion, then went on to win a Cup Championship? Bobby Labonte did it in 2000, but that’s the only example. Roush has more faith in his developmental program and his equipment than he should. The only driver to win in a Roush-Fenway car was Chris Buescher, and he just signed with a Chevy team for 2017.

Now we move on to Brian Scott. This is the sort of thing that just annoys me with professional athletes sometimes. Prior to the race at Phoenix, Scott announced that he would be retiring from driving at age 28. I’d like to quote the Richard Petty Motorsports press release if I may:

“MOORESVILLE, N.C. (November 10, 2016) – Richard Petty Motorsports and Brian Scott today announced Scott, driver of the No. 44 Richard Petty Motorsports Ford, will retire from full-time competition in NASCAR at the end of the 2016 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series season. Scott has made the personal decision to focus on his young and growing family and also the next phase of his career.”

Let me see I understand this correctly, you are giving up a job that pays very well, where you have no real worries providing for your family, to focus on your family. I looked this up, and I discovered that Brian Scott’s career earnings in the top three series are over $10 million, and that’s just on-track, that doesn’t factor into endorsements. You are also one of the few drivers who has built-in sponsorships. You don’t have as much trouble as some drivers in finding companies to sponsor your team.

Also, you retired to “focus on the next phase of your career.” Someone please explain to me what in the Hell that means? What is this “next phase?” You have worked your whole life to become a race car driver, but now you have retired. I hope you have a decent education, and can find a decent place to work, because very few places pay as well as your previous job, and I’m willing to bet your savings won’t carry through for 18 years.

Something else that went under the radar in recent weeks is that it was announced that Phoenix International Raceway is making some improvements to the track. Now normally, I would be all for it, because that usualy means that there are new fan amenities and some new stuff for the driver. Then I saw what was being done, and I went into shock. Here is the generalized list, according to NBC Sports:

-The start/finish line is shown to be in what is now Turn 2.

-All the frontstretch grandstands would be eliminated and replaced by an elevated RV parking lot and have additional parking behind it.

-The Allison grandstand in Turn 2 will be extended to go through the entire turn.

-Pit road will be moved closer to the infield and have a tighter radius. That will allow additional space between the track and pit road.

-There would be five new garages for competitors.

-The media center would be moved from its present location across from the current start/finish line to just beyond Turn 2.

-The infield care center would move from behind the current media center to between what is now Turns 3 and 4.

-Victory Lane would be moved behind pit road to spot between what is now Turns 1 and 2.

When I saw that the front-stretch grandstands would be eliminated, and that the start/finish line would be moved to turn two, I honestly thought it was a joke of some kind, but the plans that have been submitted clearly show this is the real setup. What in the world is going on here? Was the racing in Phoenix so bad, that the track had to be drastically changed? I didn’t think it was bad. It boggles the mind that someone not only came up with this, but submitted the plans for approval. I can only hope the racing is as good as they want it to be.

As of this writing, NASCAR hasn’t announced a series sponsor for the Cup series. I’m going to start my winter break after Saturday, but if the announcement comes through, I will discuss the new sponsor and new logos. See you in January.