Last Lap: Do we need a Texas two-step?

My hope was to be proven dead wrong. Didn't happen.

I'd hoped the action in Sunday's Samsung/RadioShack 500 would be so enthralling that a Texas two-step would no longer be debatable. A good race might somehow make the seemingly inevitable acceptable.

	Marty Smith

Instead, it's Tuesday and the legitimacy of going to Texas twice annually is as debatable as ever.

Seriously, don't let the whole "eighth closest finish in NASCAR history" fool you. The finish was awesome and I'm happier than a pig in slop for Elliott Sadler, but the race was rather mundane.

And quite honestly, were it not for a few debatable caution laps, Kasey Kahne may well have won the thing by five seconds. The winner said so himself.

"It 100 percent benefited me," Sadler said of the lengthy caution period. "I thought the more caution laps we could run, the less time (Kahne) had to get up through the field. We knew nobody could run with him, but keep running cautions, keep running cautions...

"I kept looking at him and he went from eighth to seventh and stayed there through that long stretch of caution laps. I couldn't believe he got up there that quick.

"I looked and I was pulling away from Junior and I was trying to run (Jeff Gordon). By the time I got by (Gordon), I looked and (Kahne) was already on (Dale Jr's) back bumper. I went, 'Man, he's already made it this far?' The extra caution laps definitely helped our chances of winning here today."

Marty Smith  •  Email  •  Archive

Having replaced North Wilkesboro, Texas already carries a black mark with many traditional fans. And now Rockingham and Darlington are staring down the barrel of a Texas-sized six-shooter.

To its credit, TMS offered a significantly more functional second groove than we've seen in years past, and with a few more seasons of maturation it should have three racing lanes. But on Sunday, the racing wasn't captivating.

It wasn't Ricky Craven/Kurt Busch, Darlington, SC, 2003. Nor was it Matt Kenseth/Kasey Kahne, Rockingham, NC, 2004.

Not that that matters much. TMS invariably sells out, 155,000 strong. Impressive, yes. And these days, having 155,000 individuals in their respective seat is far more important than having millions on the edge of it.

Here's hoping that in the next few years it'll mature to the point of producing finishes like, say, Kevin Harvick/Jeff Gordon, Hampton, Ga., 2001.

Based on your opinion of Sunday's race, does Texas Motor Speedway deserve a second race date?

3man: The market deserves one, but the track does not. And certainly not at the expense of the Southern 500. NASCAR keeps giving races to the cookie cutter tracks, keeps making up dumb rules and it's making the sport worse. I know, I know. It's gotten so much more popular over the last 15 years.

But, in my opinion, you could have monkeys running the sport and it would get more popular. Even if you make the sport worse, it's still better than all other forms of racing, so everyone will still watch. Give me the early 90's any day. 30 races, not a single track that resembled another, no such thing as aero-push, the racing was great back then.

This is an excellent answer, one that speaks well for the general consensus on this issue. Most of you agree that the Dallas/Ft. Worth market is a racing hotbed, and absolutely warrants a second date. Those 155,000 on-site spectators stand as proof.

	Credit: Autostock

Conversely, the million folks back home asleep on the couch speak, or snore, as it were, for the competition.

smslevin: People oftentimes forget what NASCAR is. It's a business. We can pretend that the sport exists to simply entertain and pay homage to the past, but in the end it is all dollars and cents. Period. With that in mind, does Texas deserve a second date? Absolutely.

Did you happen to take a peek at the grandstands during qualifying Friday? In case you didn't, the crowd was larger than the last race at Rockingham or Darlington. The crowd Sunday was as it has been for 8 straight years -- one of the 3 largest, and sold out.

As far as the racing goes, Texas isn't the best, but it is far from the worst and it continues to improve year to year. The facilities are first rate, the market is perfect and we saw the 8th closest finish in NASCAR history Sunday. I think Sadler will agree with me on this one as he deposits his check for $507k -- the Nextel Cup series needs to visit Texas twice a year.

MESSAGE BOARD  •  Read all the opinions!

Jackie Stiles is dead-on, as well. Folks get all wrapped up in traditionalism and forget about the bottom line -- that being, of course, the bottom line. NASCAR is about money, now more than ever. Why do you think there's an official toilet paper of NASCAR? (Not really, but you get the point).

Every time you see the NASCAR logo, be it on a hat, t-shirt, box of candy or cell phone, the sanctioning body is making royalty money. Every time you buy a beer at Daytona, they're making money. Every time you turn on the television, remember that Fox and NBC paid them more than $2 billion to broadcast NASCAR racing. And butts in seats means more money for NASCAR.

It's pretty simple. Well done, Jackie.

BigE_lives_on: If I was to base my decision solely on yesterday's race, then I'd have to say no. The racing really wasn't all that exciting. The field got strung out quickly, and there wasn't really much battling for the lead except right at the end when Kahne was trying to close the deal.

Maybe it was because Kahne was just TOO good yesterday. He should have won that race hands down. I don't know if it's the new tire and aero package that's making the racing so lackluster this year, but it's certainly not a banner year for excitement.

Several drivers have voiced the opinion to me in recent weeks that the racing will only get worse as more teams figure out the tire/aero package. Right now, it seems teams are either really dialed in or really out to lunch, which enables drivers with superior cars to pass slower cars in traffic.

But according to many drivers, once more teams figure out the setup, the dreaded aero push will once again render passing extremely difficult, and races will once again start being decided by fuel mileage. That, in turn, means teams will have spent millions on tires and aero tweaks, only to end up right back where they started.

Big3Fan: Attendance figures say they can sell out another race or maybe another 3 races a year. TV ratings won't show that for the middle third of the race, I was looking at the back of my eyelids, because I still had the race on TV so the TV ratings will also be strong again.

Makes you wonder about the validity of television ratings, doesn't it?

foofoorabt: As this track has gotten some age on it, the racing has gotten better. And 200,000 people come out to watch it. I suspect they would with a second date. That's a lot of folks and something hard to ignore.

Who knows, with a second date, maybe they'll add some Homestead-style banking and really add some fun. True enough, for Texas to get a second date, it will probably come at the expense of another track. But I think that if it isn't done for Texas, it will be for another track and Texas has a proven attendance record.

Bunny Fufu is no foo. Great response here. I agree wholeheartedly that the consistent lack of attendance at remote Southeastern venues has marked their demise. Were Darlington and Rockingham selling out twice a year and forcing expansion of grandstands and amenities -- see: Martinsville -- we wouldn't be having this discussion. A better date on the calendar would help tremendously, but we may be past that at this point.

And if the Francis Ferko lawsuit doesn't shift those dates to Speedway Motorsports tracks like Texas or Vegas, I think International Speedway Corp., would look seriously at moving them to another one of their tracks such as Chicago, Phoenix or Kansas City.

nascarchick: Between existing tracks and tracks being built throughout the US, I don't think any track deserves two dates. Visit every track once and allow for the newer tracks to filter into the schedule.

Keep Rockingham and Darlington on the schedule but add Kentucky and the proposed new track in the Northwest. It would keep the schedule from becoming any longer but allow for growth and the addition of new tracks.

NASCAR could do this if they so desired, since track sanctions are renewed annually. Problem is, several venues warrant more than one date: Bristol, Charlotte, Talladega, Daytona, Richmond, maybe even Martinsville.

	The way things stand, Elliott Sadler will reign as Texas champ until next year. Credit: Autostock

There are currently 23 tracks on the Nextel Cup tour. So if we hit each one once, and the aforementioned six twice, that brings us to 29 dates. Throw in the Seattle market, Kentucky and Nashville and we're at 32.

That leaves room for the coveted New York market, if land is ever secured to build a track there. To be more realistic, let's give two dates to California Speedway and New York. Thirty-five races, nationwide, in every major market in the union. Everyone is happy -- except, of course, the owners/operators who lost a date.

But if a venue needed only focus on one event per year instead of planning for two, you can bet the single-event weekend would be spectacular. That might, in turn, make for a more engaging fan experience. Who knows? I'm just rattling off ideas...

gogregbiffle: Not as long as they spend 90% of the race in single file with one dominant car out in front. True, the dominant car didn't win either Saturday or Sunday, but neither race was the sort you want to see over again. And the IROC race, with all equal cars, was even duller. The tracks that deserve second dates are the ones that offer races, not high-speed parades.

In so many words, the overwhelming majority of people wrote the very same response. Despite the huge grandstand draw, it's difficult to justify a second Texas date until the racing gets better.

And traffic, it would appear.

Sher8: Only if they fix traffic. Traffic in and out of Texas Motor Speedway sucks. At least they got rid of the mud hole of a parking lot! (Or so I hear!)

3and18and20: Personally I say yes, because there has been 8 races there and 8 different winners. In 8 races only one driver has finished in the top 10 five times, and only two drivers finished in the top 10 four times, so no one has gotten a good handle on TMS yet.

And if they have to replace a track with it, let it be one of the road courses, maybe Michigan(I've watched a few BORING races at that track), or New Hampshire.

Pocono, anyone? Going there twice in less than two months is absurd. At the very least, they need to drop both Pocono races to 300 miles.

gr8eight: No, I don't think Texas "deserves" another race date. Although the finish was exciting, the rest of the race was pretty boring. I like to see the races that rely more on the driver than how the car is handling, etc. Give me Talladega any day!! Martinsville still rocks, and Darlington is the most "deserving" track there is. The road courses are alright for a change of pace, but there are already enough of the 1.5 mile, parade lap, two groove, follow the leader type tracks.

Hate to tell you, Cal Ripken, but Talladega is all car and engine. Kevin Harvick says his wife, DeLana, could drive Talladega (alone, mind you) if the car and motor are good. Obviously drafting takes skill, but for the most part it's mash it and ride.

829Fan: Based solely on Sunday's race, it would seem that it would be appropriate to give Texas a second date. It had a fair share of lead changes and an exciting finish, although some people may disagree (I'm sorry, but EVERY race cannot be like Talladega or Daytona).

That said, I do not like the idea of track owners pulling dates from other tracks. While I think Texas is more like Atlanta than Kansas or Chicago, Darlington and The Rock are unique, are a part of NASCAR's history and deserve two races.

Unfortunately, they are also in an area that is flooded with races throughout the season. With that area saturated with races, fans cannot afford to go to all of them. And that means that no matter what public opinion is, the "historic" tracks of NASCAR will lose races to newer venues just so the track owners can sell out the facilities.

Yep. Regardless your opinion, that's the bottom line: The bottom line.

The Last Lap appears every Tuesday at 3 p.m. ET. The opinions listed here are solely those of the writer.