|
|
|
|
|
Topic: 2013 World of Outlaws Schedule
|
Email this topic to a friend |
Subscribe to this Topic
| Report this Topic to Moderator
|
|
Page 2 of 2 of 24 replies
|
|
|
|
|
December 07, 2012 at
12:26:29 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/31/2012
|
|
Posts:
|
995
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: dsc1600 on December 07 2012 at 12:01:21 PM
Yes but hours and hours of listening to the drag racing guy try to find a name for the Friday event was really riveting.
And no offense, but you're completely off when you say all the fans on Saturday are "hardcore". I had 2 guys sitting next to me last year who raced IMCA mods at Boone. They knew about 3 drivers, including Kinser, Schatz, and the guy's favorite, "the guy who keeps getting hurt in Ohio" (Saldana).
|
Funny. But I'm willing to bet that was not the point he was trying to make. Let me try to make it another way: Would you go to the Knoxville Nationals if it did not have a WoO sanction? I know I would if I could. If something - say for example USAC which is always my favorite example - does not ADD value in excess of what it costs to have them they do not need to be there. The same applies to the WoO but don't tell them that because it may deflate their egos a tad. They need the Nationals A LOT more than the Nationals needs them. Same goes for the Ultimate Challenge just down the road. USAC was willing to bend over literally backwords to be able to sanction that show. Thankfully McCarl recognized how badly they wanted it and made them beg. Whose format do they run for the Ultimate Challenge? Not USAC's. That negotiation started with "OK - how bad do you want it?" as it should for someone who is in a position of LEVERAGE. Which is right where the folks that make decisions about the Nationals are.
|
|
|
|
|
December 07, 2012 at
04:57:34 PM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
05/31/2007
|
|
Posts:
|
4421
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: threadkillllllller on December 07 2012 at 12:26:29 PM
Funny. But I'm willing to bet that was not the point he was trying to make. Let me try to make it another way: Would you go to the Knoxville Nationals if it did not have a WoO sanction? I know I would if I could. If something - say for example USAC which is always my favorite example - does not ADD value in excess of what it costs to have them they do not need to be there. The same applies to the WoO but don't tell them that because it may deflate their egos a tad. They need the Nationals A LOT more than the Nationals needs them. Same goes for the Ultimate Challenge just down the road. USAC was willing to bend over literally backwords to be able to sanction that show. Thankfully McCarl recognized how badly they wanted it and made them beg. Whose format do they run for the Ultimate Challenge? Not USAC's. That negotiation started with "OK - how bad do you want it?" as it should for someone who is in a position of LEVERAGE. Which is right where the folks that make decisions about the Nationals are.
|
I definitely agree the Nationals add alot more to the WoO than the WoO adds to the Nationals.
And when I say WoO I mean the organization, not the drivers because w/o the WoO drivers, the Nationals would be a shell of what it is.
Back on the schedule point, they added a date at New Egypt on May 21 to fill one of those TBA dates.
|
|
|
|
|
December 08, 2012 at
02:10:40 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
04/18/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
4764
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: StanM on December 06 2012 at 05:50:58 PM
Maybe they're just showing it on their schedule because that's where their drivers will be that week. I believe that other groups do the same thing even though they're not sanctioning the Nationals. There's no sense splitting those short and curly hairs or getting hung up over words. 
|
exactly what i was thinking.
How much would could a wouldchuck chuck if a
wouldchuck could chuck would
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 08, 2012 at
02:15:01 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
04/18/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
4764
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: NWFAN on December 07 2012 at 08:43:36 AM
kyle has done extremely well since joining the roth team. he and tk will definately put on a show next year...
|
In homer fashion of the 360's I would always sound off that it would be cool if the WoO didn't run that weekend.
which is both ignorant and kind of selfish considering both shows do very well - so fans in both areas can enjoy. never seen a race in the Show Me State. Be nice to find a solid time to get as many tracks in as possible in a two weekend stretch. I'm sure Pevely is great, but I would like to make a trip to Valley, LA, Wheatland, Cameron, Double X. never been to any of them. One of the races I distantly covered ran a non wing class too - that would be a great show to attend.
How much would could a wouldchuck chuck if a
wouldchuck could chuck would
|
|
|
|
|
December 10, 2012 at
11:06:34 AM
|
|
|
Joined:
|
01/20/2005
|
|
Posts:
|
2079
|
|
|
Reply to:
Posted By: threadkillllllller on December 07 2012 at 12:26:29 PM
Funny. But I'm willing to bet that was not the point he was trying to make. Let me try to make it another way: Would you go to the Knoxville Nationals if it did not have a WoO sanction? I know I would if I could. If something - say for example USAC which is always my favorite example - does not ADD value in excess of what it costs to have them they do not need to be there. The same applies to the WoO but don't tell them that because it may deflate their egos a tad. They need the Nationals A LOT more than the Nationals needs them. Same goes for the Ultimate Challenge just down the road. USAC was willing to bend over literally backwords to be able to sanction that show. Thankfully McCarl recognized how badly they wanted it and made them beg. Whose format do they run for the Ultimate Challenge? Not USAC's. That negotiation started with "OK - how bad do you want it?" as it should for someone who is in a position of LEVERAGE. Which is right where the folks that make decisions about the Nationals are.
|
Yes, that is partly what I was trying to say, now here's another take from a different perspective.
I work in the business world, to me the inclusion of the Nationals on the schedule (until an agreement has been signed), is very disingenuous and I would be leery of working with the WRG as they are showing that they are not always on the up and up to their fans, their competitors, and most imporatantly to their sponsors (they are telling their sponsors that they have an event that they currently DO NOT have).
What's worse from a business perspective?
(A) Put out a schedule with a race on it (the BIGGEST RACE of the year for that matter) and promote my sponsors on it, and then have to revise my schedule and take thaose dates off of it and tell the sponsors that gave me $$$ that we just couldn't come to an agreement).
Or (B) Put TBA on the schedule and make sure my sponsors know that I am doing everything in my power to get this event on my schedule, If I do, I get to put out another big press release announcing the addition of the event and mentioning my sponsors again.
As a person who works in the business world, my company wants option (B), they don't want the chance of option (A) even happening because it makes them (the sponsor) look just as bad as the sanctioning body.
|
|
|
