What rankels me about NASCAR Coverage...

[ct2874]

...isn't the coverage of the race itself, per se, but the constant efforts by both major media outlets that cover the sport (especially ESPN) to turn a blind eye to the title sponsors of particular races.

For example, this week's race is the Auto Club 500. However, ESPN will only refer to the race as the generic, pedestrian, "Sprint Cup Series at California". Not only is it pedestrian, but it's sort of a misnomer since that title implies that there is only one race at that track when in fact there are two.

For next week, Fox is re-naming the UAW-Dodge 400 the "Sprint Cup 400 at Las Vegas".

What I'd like to know is why either NASCAR, the two main TV media outlets, or both, seem to be insistent on performing this practice of re-naming races. It would be akin to calling the PGA Tour's Wachovia Championship "the PGA Tour at Charlotte". Very ridiculous and in my mind, a losing proposition.

 

[Newname]

I wouldn't mind if the 'corporate naming' of races/golf tournaments ended altogether.
I'm sure Fox or whoever airs the events will make sure to include all sponsor references in the appropriate places.

 

[azumanga]

In my opinion, the most ridiculous name for a race was when "The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie" was released in theaters -- NASCAR had a race called "The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie 400". Not SBSP 400, but SBSP Movie 400. For obvious reasons, that was the only race by that title.

 

[kyscott]

NASCAR races used to be fun to watch on TV and attend. However, they started making money with them and they sold out. It's like any major league sport now. NASCAR has made sure that all the races are "dumbed down" and none of the drivers can show any emotion without getting penalized somehow. My interest in NASCAR has dwindled just like my interest in MLB, NFL and NBA.

 

[BRice16]

Fox's policy has always been to include the race name for a fee. Auto Club paid it for the Fox Telecast, UAW-Dodge has not for next week.

 

[FloydB]

I just wish they'd stop sponsoring their series. I thought a few would get confused when they changed the Winston Cup to the Nextel Cup (now the Sprint Cup). Sprint Cup, which is dumb, because there is a sprint car series. But, now the Busch Series is now the Nationwide Series. I did not know that until the Daytona 500 (I'm a fan, but not a die-hard watcher). No other national sport has their league sponsored like that. I mean, how would it sound if MLB had the Ford League and the Delta League, or if the NFL had the Nike Conference and the Dell Conference, and the winners of the Chevrolet Conference Championship played for the Snickers trophy in the 20th Century Fox Bowl, which is broadcast on NBC this year?

As far as the race names are concerned, I understand the broadcasters paid a lot of money for the rights to air the races, but NASCAR should have put a stipulation in the contract that the broadcasters should name the races as sponsored, seeing that the sponsors already came heavy out of pocket to sponsor the entire race. But, they didn't and now the sponsors have to shell out even more money to get their name mentioned on air. If I was a race sponsor, I'd be pissed at NASCAR for not making that stipulation.

 

[PTBoardOp94]

The sponsor titles are a good way to differentiate the multiple series, though.

How would FOX tell people that the "Sprint Cup" race will be on, and next weekend, Fox will air both the Sprint Cup and the Nationwide Series if they weren't branded?

 

[DToTheJ]

I recall around New Year's, when ESPN displayed Bowl Game scores on its "bottom line", it always included the sponsor for Bowl Games carried on ESPN as well as ABC (e.g. the Citi Rose Bowl), yet Bowl Games not shown on ESPN/ABC (e.g. Tostitos Sun Bowl) were referred to without the sponsor part.

 

[FloydB]

The sponsor titles are a good way to differentiate the multiple series, though.

How would FOX tell people that the "Sprint Cup" race will be on, and next weekend, Fox will air both the Sprint Cup and the Nationwide Series if they weren't branded?

Simple: Give them a name, but a name that relates to the sport as opposed to a sponsorship. When I go see the Rome, GA Braves, I know they're in the South Atlantic League of Single A Minor League Baseball. For us race fans, we all know that ARCA is the "Single A" league of NASCAR. The Craftsman Truck Series would be "AA", and the Nationwide Series "AAA", even though some of the "big leaguers" drive in all three series. Do you think NASCAR fans would be opposed to calling the major series the "Dale Earnhardt Cup Series", or the "Benny Parsons Cup Series", or after any of the other legends? I mean, football named their biggest prize the Lombardi trophy, so why can't NASCAR do the same? It'll add more dignity to the sport, and it'll gain more respecability from the critics.

 

[ixnay]

I wouldn't mind if the 'corporate naming' of races/golf tournaments ended altogether.

How about the "corporate naming" of sports venues? I wouldn't mind seeing THAT disappear.

ixnay

 

[ixnay]

I did not know that until the Daytona 500 (I'm a fan, but not a die-hard watcher).

During its CBS run, wasn't Daytona called the "Daytona 500 presented by STP"?

(H)ow would it sound if MLB had the Ford League and the Delta League,

Which sponsor would get the National League and which the American League and why?

or if the NFL had the Nike Conference and the Dell Conference,

Again, which sponsor would get the NFC and which the AFC and why?

and the winners of the Chevrolet Conference Championship played for the Snickers trophy

I don't think the Lombardi family would object as long as Vince's wasn't totally eliminated from the trophy, but I'm an Eagle fan so I don't know.

As far as the race names are concerned, I understand the broadcasters paid a lot of money for the rights to air the races, but NASCAR should have put a stipulation in the contract that the broadcasters should name the races as sponsored, seeing that the sponsors already came heavy out of pocket to sponsor the entire race. But, they didn't and now the sponsors have to shell out even more money to get their name mentioned on air. If I was a race sponsor, I'd be pissed at NASCAR for not making that stipulation.

 

[ixnay]

Slightly OT: Did Fox air for the east coast any of its prime time block during the delays of the Fontana race?

ixnay

 

[zman]

I was told by one of my co workers that "The Simpson's" aired during the delay. I was at the radio station running the board for the race, boy was that a long shift I spent fifteen hours at the station then came back the next day to actually run it. At least the pay check will be nice . Sorry got a little off topic. That's what i was told anyway. Now I don't know if it was a re run. I imagine it was but someone who actually saw it can confirm if it was a re run or not. I'm in the cenrtral time zone btw.

 

[avtosalon]

For example, this week's race is the Auto Club 500. However, ESPN will only refer to the race as the generic, pedestrian, "Sprint Cup Series at California". Not only is it pedestrian, but it's sort of a misnomer since that title implies that there is only one race at that track when in fact there are two.

How does "Sprint Cup Series at California" imply that there is only one race? That label just means that you are watching the Sprint Cup Series. It does not state that there was only one series racing at track over the weekend, or if there were any other series there also. The label is correct (except for the "at California" part) as long as the network does not use it during the telecast of a different series.

The part that is misleading is "at California". The network is referring to the name of the track--not the state. However, 'California Speedway' is no longer the name of the track. Naming rights of the facility were sold to Southern California AAA Automobile Club, and the track is now known as 'Auto Club Speedway'. So the network is ignoring the true name of the race AND the true name of the venue.

Actually there were three different Series at the track last weekend: NASCAR Craftsman Truck Series, Nascar Nationwide Series, and NASCAR Sprint Cup Series. And the 'Auto Club 500' was televised on Fox--not ESPN.

I agree with FloydB that there should be a stipulation that the broadcasters name the true name of the race at all times, and include the logo and graphics of the true sponsor of the race. The logo should be prominently dislayed at the start of the telecast. That would only be fair to the race sponsors who have paid lots of money. Furthermore, the networks are deceiving the viewers. They are televising a sporting/news event, but they are not showing what actually happened.

I think the present requirement is that the true name of the race will be mentioned only verbally a couple of times during the middle of the race. I remember back in the 90's, Cracker Barrell filed a lawsuit because the company sponsored a Cup race at Atlanta Motor Speedway, but the network renamed the race something completely different with another company. Cracker Barrell lost the lawsuit.

 

[bhayes1016]

Slightly OT: Did Fox air for the east coast any of its prime time block during the delays of the Fontana race?

ixnay

They aired a rerun of "The Simpsons" at 9:30/8:30. Not sure about what they did for Mountain/Pacific viewers.

 

[Studio20]

I believe it was local programming for the pacific...and then as the delay stretched to midnight east coast, the Simpsons aired out west...and according to the graphic.."The Family Guy" aired before the race was postponed.

 

[DToTheJ]

They aired a rerun of "The Simpsons" at 9:30/8:30. Not sure about what they did for Mountain/Pacific viewers.

In fact, all scheduled prime-time programs were reruns. In a related story, how contrived was it when Chris and Jeff actually talked up "The Simpsons" leading into the 9:30 PM (ET) showing?

 

[FloydB]

I did not know that until the Daytona 500 (I'm a fan, but not a die-hard watcher).

During its CBS run, wasn't Daytona called the "Daytona 500 presented by STP"?

Probably, but I don't remember. But, it was still called the Daytona 500. STP could've had a sponsorship agreement with the race to have it's sponsorship included, or with CBS. It was probably with CBS since NASCAR was in its "startup phase" with a national audience. The AFL and defunct roller hockey league was very liberal with the sponsors in their early years in despiration to garner operating capital. NASCAR doesn't have that problem anymore, although many of their Nationwide race team are having a major problem gaining enough money thisseason.

(H)ow would it sound if MLB had the Ford League and the Delta League,

Which sponsor would get the National League and which the American League and why?

I don't care which, whatever your preference. My point is that it sounds dumb. Just keep in mind that the divisions could and would change names once the contracts run out.

or if the NFL had the Nike Conference and the Dell Conference,

Again, which sponsor would get the NFC and which the AFC and why?

See above. It doesn't matter, just that it would be dumb.

and the winners of the Chevrolet Conference Championship played for the Snickers trophy

I don't think the Lombardi family would object as long as Vince's wasn't totally eliminated from the trophy, but I'm an Eagle fan so I don't know.

Okay, the Snickers/M&M/Mars Vince Lombardi trophy. The problem with this is that it takes away from the dignity of the award to put a price tag on it so you can have your company's name on the trophy. Hey, I'm a Georgia native, and one of the few Falcons fans, so it'll probably be a lonnnnnnnnnnnnnng time before I even get to see my boys fight for the trophy! ;D

 

[FloydB]

I agree with FloydB that there should be a stipulation that the broadcasters name the true name of the race at all times, and include the logo and graphics of the true sponsor of the race. The logo should be prominently dislayed at the start of the telecast. That would only be fair to the race sponsors who have paid lots of money. Furthermore, the networks are deceiving the viewers. They are televising a sporting/news event, but they are not showing what actually happened.

Thank you, and you brought up another valid point....

The part that is misleading is "at California". The network is referring to the name of the track--not the state. However, 'California Speedway' is no longer the name of the track. Naming rights of the facility were sold to Southern California AAA Automobile Club, and the track is now known as 'Auto Club Speedway'. So the network is ignoring the true name of the race AND the true name of the venue.

When stadiums in other sports are sponsored, they call it by the sponsorship name. Case in point: Minute Maid Park, home of the Houston Astros. It was originally called Enron Field, but Enron lost the naming after the collapse, and broadcasters were baffled what to call it for a while since the stadium didn't have an "official" name, and there was no sponsorship agreement until the deal with Coca-Cola to use their Minute Maid brand was finalized. Joe Robbie stadium, home of the Miami Dolphins and Florida Marlins, was called Pro Player Stadium by both the MLB and NFL broadcasters when Pro Player had bought the naming rights. After the contract expired, it's now Dolphins' Stadium, and named as such even when the Marlins are playing. Unlike some places (San Francisco, San Diego, Seattle, Pittsburgh), the venue in Miami/Ft Lauderdale hasn't changed, but the name sure has!

 

[FloydB]

Here's another brainstorm guys: Since the drivers are contracually obligated to mention their sponsors during a pre/post race interview, what are the odds that the broadcasters would start dumping their audio since the sponsors didn't pay for advertisement on the network? Sound ludacris, right? But doesn't all this "renaming the race and venue because they didn't pay us" pretty much fall under the same umbrella?

And, here's some hypocasy of the situation (I know my spelling's way off, but it's 1:15 in the morning, what do you expect?): NASCAR fines drivers in the winner's circle for knocking off the Busch boxes, or Powerade bottles, etc place on their cars, since these sponsors had an agreement with NASCAR, and not the race teams, to be placed on the winners' cars. So, NASCAR was protecting their investors. Now, NASCAR's not making a fuss about their sponsors getting knocked by their broadcasters? I mean, on one hand they'll hand over an exclusivity agreement with Sprint, one that caused so much fuss, making Alltell and Cingular/AT&T fight in court to sponsor their race teams in the Sprint Cup series, yet they won't lift a finger when their Race and stadium sponsor is being snubbed by the network?