Consistency or Wins? That is the Question

As the NASCAR season headed to its “Chase for the Cup,” a new points system took over which, if you weren’t too dizzy from watching cars go around in circles for eight months, brought a very interesting question to mind: “What matters more in the NASCAR Chase, wins or consistency?”
If you were to talk to some of the old-time NASCAR fans, crew chiefs, or drivers, undoubtedly they would all answer “consistency.”
Which makes perfect sense. Since winning the championship is based on points, and points are based upon performance, i.e. not only how many races you won, but how you finished in ALL of the races from February through November.
So, the general thinking was that if you ran consistently well throughout the season, and collected points each week based upon how you finish in each race, you very easily could win the title by finishing strong each week. If you end up with, say, 10-15 top-10 finishes, maybe between five and ten top-fives, and throw in three or four wins, you have a recipe for nearly guaranteed success.
That has all changed now. Here, in the 2007 season, we see how drastically things have changed in NASCAR. Jeff Gordon has had, by most accounts, a model year for another strong championship run. He has had a nearly flawless ’07 campaign right from the start, where he finished 10th at Daytona, and throughout the course of the season amassed 21 top-10 finishes, 15 top fives, 10 top-threes, four second-place finishes, and four wins, while posting just one DNF (did not finish) on the year. Gordon also finished ahead of Johnson in 16 races.
As for Johnson, along with his six wins, he recorded 16 top 10s, 14 top fives, 11 top threes, one second-place finish, and he did not finish four races. Johnson finished ahead of his mentor nine times.
When the regular season ended, and NASCAR switched to the points system for the Chase, Gordon’s season suddenly didn’t look so dominant, as his 300-plus points lead evaporated like a politician’s campaign promises.
Jimmy Johnson had a solid season, to that there is no doubt. He did not have a dominant season, not a season that other drivers looked at in awe, but it was very good, especially compared to the 41 other drivers in the Nextel Cup Series, besides Gordon.
Johnson didn’t run as consistently as Gordon, he didn’t have as many top-10 finishes, or as many top fives, but he did do one thing that Gordon did not: he won six races.
Gordon won four races on the year, but it seemed like more with all of the success he had week in and week out, all season long.
One difference in the points system once the regular season ends, is that there is a points bonus for winning races. That boded well for Johnson, because although he didn’t have the type of season that he would have liked to, he did manage to squeak out six wins, which ironically, enough, was two more than Gordon (who at that time had a lead of more than 300 points).
Since NASCAR decided to put a premium on winning races regardless of how you finish in the other races, and despite how consistently well you ran all season long, Johnson was the big winner, as he entered the “Chase Season” in first place over Gordon.
This is an issue that NASCAR needs to address. They can not simply put a premium on winning races. There has to be some value to the regular season in another way, not just if you won, or how many races you won. What happened to Jeff Gordon is not right. It completely devalues all of the hard work that he, his crew chief, and his crew did all season long to make the 24 DuPont Chevrolet a serious contender to win the NASCAR Nextel Cup Championship.
Apparently, it doesn’t matter to NASCAR whether you come in third or 43rd week in and week out, only if you won or not.
That sends a bad message to the drivers, crews, and fans of the sport. There should and must be some type of reward for running well all season long. Perhaps they should consider some type of system where the regular season points leader gets extra points, pro-rated on how much of a points lead he has accumulated.
Take, for example, that Gordon finished the season with a 400-point lead. If there was a system that awarded the driver 20 percent of the points lead and added that to the points he would have started the Chase with, Gordon would have then received an additional 80 points. That seems fair, considering that nobody really posed a threat to the No. 24 team all season long. They should get a bonus for a great season, a season where they dominated the field from start to finish.
I’m not saying that what I have suggested is the answer, or the only answer, but something has to be done. And if they like, I’ll give NASCAR all the help that I can.