Common templates a positive step?

DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. -- Welcome to Last Lap, our new open forum where fans can speak out about NASCAR's hottest topics, be heard and receive feedback -- good, bad or indifferent -- from me. Essentially, it's our own little virtual watering hole.

Today's opening installment centers on the concept of common templates, and whether or not they're a positive step for Winston Cup Series competition.

	Marty Smith

I got a few yeses, a bunch of nos and even some maybe sos. Make sure that seatbelt's fastened and hold on, this promises to be a wild ride:

Michiganmike: "If you're in the business of rebuilding wrecked racecars, then by all means you've got to love the 'one template fits everybody' deal -- especially on restrictor plate tracks. This year's 'Big One' will make the earlier ones look like a two-car rear-ender!"

True, Mikey, for most of the Budweiser Shootout the only thing tighter than the competition was Ms. Winston's pants.

In fact, the cars were bunched so tightly at times that it appeared the new rules had reverted us right back to a few years ago when NASCAR mandated roof spoilers on the cars, and drivers were forced to compete inches apart for 500 miles. It's breathtaking for us to watch, but exhausting both mentally and physically for the boys behind the wheel.

But, true to form, pit stops strung out the field to the point that the first several cars finished single-file. That's the whole reason the new smaller fuel cell was introduced in the first place. Point, NASCAR.

Dodge40: "I agree with the idea of going back to "bring the car from the showroom floor-run it-win and people will buy on Monday theory. The manufacturer's sell the car with the concepts of being airodynamic, hig proformanced so let the race drivers show just how well they are! Bring back the excitement from the past and everyone will be on their sits. Petty, Yarbourgh, Baker did it! All the cars being simular and all measurements the same makes it a boring race."

What the? Is that Swahili? Maybe this guy can help us out:

Marty Smith  •  Email  •  Archive

Eliottfan14: "I think this isn't good for the sport. NASCAR was founded on not only driver-to-driver competition, but car maker-to-car maker as well. People back then, up to now, loved rooting for not only their favorite driver, but their favorite car make as well."

Take away this facet of this sport, and you remove the soul of the sport with it. In my opinion, if one car make is better than the others, it is a direct result of hard work to make it better. The teams and manufacturer should be rewarded for a job well done, not limited. Take away common templates and in-season car rule changes in the name of equality. Unless they are to take away aero push, which common templates isn't exactly helping to do..."

Essentially, Dodge40 and E14 would prefer teams be required to run tweaked up production cars rather than today's carbon copies, which many fans feel are distinguishable only by colors and decals. In other words, they yearn for NASCAR, circa 1978.

This is a common response, especially among older fans. But it's simply not feasible. NASCAR has evolved into an intricate science, and all this would do is set them back a quarter-century.

It would, however, take a ton of pressure off of the sanctioning body. The pressure to excel would rest squarely on the shoulders of the manufacturers, so the boys at NASCAR wouldn't have to hear all the griping.

Hmm. Maybe Mike Helton and the boys should consider it, after all.

Brian ZT: "There has been a lot of talk about this make or that make having the advantage at different tracks. I am a firm believer that if you've got a good driver in the seat, you're going to do well anywhere."

Uh, not so much. Not even Jeff Gordon could win in crap equipment in today's NASCAR. Ask any driver and they'll tell you straight up -- if you don't have capable equipment, you don't have a chance. Especially at Daytona and Talladega, where it's all car and very little driver.

Ktulu029: "I think this is a good and bad idea. The good thing is it puts more emphasis on the teams. The ones who are good at building their motors and have good drivers will excel. The bad thing is it is going to congest the pack of cars more than it was, and one little slip up is going to cause one hell of a wreck, and no one really wants to see that happen. But if the race goes with out any slips, then it will be a thrill ride keeping every one on the edge of their seats. It will be interesting."

This cat knows what's up. Very well said.

Labontecraven: "I believe the change will be a great move for NASCAR. I would rather see a change of this kind happen at the beginning of the season rather than get into half of the season and have one of the car makes get a major change. As we all know, when a make of car gets a change in the middle of the season we all tend to whine and cry and say that is the big reason for a certain team to win or lose.

"I believe we all agree that if we put the sport back in the hands of the crews and drivers we all will see better results. I will be happy to agree that starting with the same or close to the same body style may be just the thing we need. It will also make a team find another edge somewhere else that will make another team work harder to find the same results."

Yet another awesome response. Matter of fact, Dale Earnhardt, Jr. said something quite similar Monday after qualifying second for the Daytona 500, continuing his phenomenal run on restrictor plate tracks:

"I guarantee you if we build a Ford, a Pontiac, we can make it run just as fast as we make our Chevrolets run. It makes me angry that sometimes we get a disadvantage because we work harder."

Good old-fashioned hard work. Imagine that. Whether you're in favor of common templates or detest them, it appears a single premise rings true, one that has been a staple of NASCAR since day one:

He who works the hardest (and has sufficient cash) succeeds.