Originally Posted on August 16, 2006 on Foxsports.com
Am I the only one who wonders why Jeremy Mayfield was booted mid-season? I'm sure that Evernham viewed his comments about his absentee ownership as treacherous. However, Mayfields's lawsuit brought about by his firing certainly spells out more dirty laundry than his comments at Chicago did. Specifically, that Evernham was more interested in his female driver than he was in his Cup teams. Evernham denied this, but it has drug the underlying issue out in the open. What doesn' t make sense to me is why boot a driver mid-season? At this point, Evernham should be focused on getting Kahne back into the Chase, not on how a team not in contention is doing. I know the #19 is now 36th in points, and must qualify on time, but Mayfield has thus far been able to do that. I would think that as the only driver at Evernham Motorsports who has been in the Chase (and two times at that), Mayfield deserved the courtesy of waiting until the end of the year. Frankly, he deserved to keep his crew from last year, and not get Kahne's leftovers.
Am I the only one who hopes Elliott Sadler's jump to Evernham will work out? Let's see, Sadler's team is higher in points than Mayfield's. He had Yates power, but will gain Evernham's engineering know-how. He loses a fantastic sponsor in M&Ms. He was going to lose his close friend and teammate Dale Jarrett. He now must qualify on speed in a car that frankly hasn't been that fast this year. Sadler has had the reputation as the great hope since his jump from Wood Brothers to Yates. To some degree that materialized in 2004. However, since then, his performance has been lackluster. Maybe a change of scenery will do the trick.
Am I the only one hoping that the #20 and the #99 get together on the track again? And if the #9 is anywhere around, he needs to immediately apply the brakes! Edwards and Stewart's feud has taken a life of its own. It's fun to watch the villian take on the squeeky clean boy next door. Golly, I don't know who I want to win this week!
Am I the only one wondering why if Shane Hmiel can admit that he used marijuana and cocaine in a civil lawsuit, why Nascar doesn't have the guts to announce it when it suspended him? Hmiel had to make the admissions in a civil suit addressing his pay. The big question when he was suspended again this year was what substances he had taken. Nascar was close-lipped about it, probably due to the problems it ran into with the Tim Richmond situation. Nascar certainly can have the drivers waive any objection to the drug test being announced- it owns the ballpark, so it choses the rules. They publicly announce and display illegal parts and actions. Why not positive drug test results?
Am I the only one wondering who is going to drive the #38 this week? Or the rest of the year? Or next year? The presumption is that David Guililand will be the driver, but if he drives more than 6 races in 2006, he will not be eligible for Rookie of the Year next year. Given the number of good drivers out there, it would seem that another driver could substitute for some of the races. And let him run for ROTY next year.
Am I the only one who wonders why winning drivers don't have rides? Ward Burton, Ricky Craven, Jeremy Mayfield, Bill Elliott and Ricky Rudd all come to mind. I know Elliott and Rudd are "retired" but it seems like what they really want is a reduced schedule - no more 38 race seasons, but to cherry pick a few races here and there. Why doesn't some megateam do that for them? Can you imagine if you had a stable of Elliott, Rudd, Mark Martin, Terry Labonte and Rusty Wallace to choose from? Why do teams think that young drivers are the way to go? Vickers and Mears have never won at the cup level. The veterans have legions of fans who are loyal and would support their driver in any car. The marketing machines have sold the idea that younger is better. Oh yeah? Take a look at your current top 10 - the majority are older than 25 years old. Most are near or over 30. Many have several years experience in Cup racing. So much for young guns.
No comments:
Post a Comment