Drivers resist proposed change in points system

The format NASCAR uses to crown its champions came under fire this year, the result of a runaway title by Matt Kenseth.

Officials from the sanctioning body hinted all season the points system could be altered, but if a proposal up for discussion is enacted, the sport is in for a drastic change.

Under the proposed system, the top 10 drivers in the points would be frozen with 10 races to go, with those 10 the only ones to have a chance at winning the championship. Whoever scores the most points of those 10 in the final 10 races - NASCAR's "postseason" - would be the champion.

	Jeff Burton: "The way to keep the point race close and to keep the point race interesting is to not take so many points away from the guy that has a bad day."

The change would be un-NASCAR-like, as the sanctioning body has been conservative in its willingness to alter the way it does things. But there is much change coming in 2004, with Nextel taking over as title sponsor of NASCAR's top series.

Under the proposed system, Jimmie Johnson would have been the 2003 champion instead of Kenseth. But Johnson said Tuesday he still wouldn't be in favor of the new system.

"I understand what they're trying to achieve, trying to make it more exciting, but look at the Busch Series and the Truck Series this year - they came down to the last lap of the last race," Johnson said. "What do you do? Do you send the other teams home and just let the top-10 teams run? It's not fair, in my opinion. I'm not in favor of it."

Kenseth, who clinched the title in the penultimate race of the season, would have finished seventh under the new system. He won the championship this year based on season-long consistency, with only three finishes outside the top 25.

Another wrinkle is locking in the top 10, though NASCAR said it could have a provision for adding one or two drivers who are close to the top 10. If such a system was in place in 2003 -- without the added provision -- neither defending Winston Cup champion Tony Stewart nor Bill Elliott would have been able to scramble inside the top 10.

	Matt Kenseth: "A championship team doesn't come in and finish first 10 times and finish last 10 times."

Stewart was 11th after the 26th race, 61 out of 10th. Elliott was 16th, 292 behind 10th-place Michael Waltrip.

Kenseth, who had his three worst finishes in the final 10 races, said during the season he wasn't in favor of changing the points because the champion should be the most consistent all year.

"I think the points system is pretty good," Kenseth said. "Even last year people asked me because we won five races and finished eighth in the points, they thought that was so terrible. I think that's good.

"I remember the years Rusty Wallace would win 10 races, but he would blow up in 10 races. Well, that's not the sign of a championship team. A championship team doesn't come in and finish first 10 times and finish last 10 times because their equipment wasn't reliable and they all didn't do their job.

"The sign of a championship team is it's not just about the driver or just about winning one or two races on a Sunday, it's about putting together a whole season and not dropping out of races and not crashing and how bad your bad days are.

"I don't think it's right in a series that long to have it where a guy can go out and win one week and the next week he can crash and finish last and still win it. I think it has to be built on consistency and how good of a job everybody did at the shop and at the race track all year."

Kenseth isn't the only champion who wouldn't have won had the proposed system been in place. The current system was started in 1975 and has been used without change since.

	Gordon: ""I have no problem with it staying the way it is."

But if the proposed system was used, 13 of the 29 champions would have been different. Sterling Marlin would have won in 2001 instead of Jeff Gordon, for example.

Gordon, in a NASCAR.com chat session last week, likes the current system.

"I have no problem with it staying the way it is," Gordon told fans. "I have been racing this points system my whole NASCAR career and I race to win championships, but if they change it, I will live with it and continue racing to win championships.

If they do change it, I hope it is minor. I hope they give the winner more points and just spread the rest of points over the positions more, and maybe then you can throw out that bad day and rebound a little bit easier with a good one."

Other drivers who wouldn't mind keeping the current system are Bobby and Terry Labonte, who finished eighth and 10th, respectively, in the 2003 Winston Cup standings.

Bobby, who won the 2000 Winston Cup championship largely on the strength of 24 top-10 finishes and no DNFs, echoed Gordon in saying he would race whatever system was in place, though he preferred no dire changes.

Terry, who won championships under the current system in 1984 and 1996, has repeatedly said he could not support any change in the point structure and that no changes are necessary in his opinion.

Jeff Burton wouldn't mind a change, but not with the winner. Burton said he'd like to see some bad races not have so much effect.

"If you want to look at how the points are awarded, what we need to look at is how do we keep it competitive and how do we keep the point race close," Burton said. "Awarding the winner more points doesn't do that.

"The way to keep the point race close and to keep the point race interesting is to not take so many points away from the guy that has a bad day. That's how you make the point race close.

"I think it's obvious that it works. If you look at F-1 racing, when the Ferrari team wins all the races, the championship is done four races before the year is over. The way to keep it close is to not make the penalty for finishing bad as big."

Marty Smith and Dave Rodman contributed to this story.