![]()

Stands not an indicator of Atlanta's place in NASCAR (cont'd)
That's not to say that other tracks -- particularly California, based so near to Los Angeles -- don't have a heavy corporate presence in their suites and infield hospitality facilities. But the established nature of NASCAR in Atlanta, combined with the abundance of racing-affiliated companies that call the city home, heightens the sponsor presence to a level that few other facilities can match. It's not something that comes across on television, not something that can be quantified as easily as butts in the seats. But as the teams with blank hoods on their racecars will attest, it's the sponsors that ultimately make this sport go.
Inbox of insensitivity
Wednesday's column about the process that led to the positioning of the SAFER barriers at Las Vegas Motor Speedway -- and the possibility that they could be extended, not just as Las Vegas but at every 1.5-mile tri-oval in the wake of Jeff Gordon's crash there last Sunday -- provoked plenty of e-mails from readers who can't see why NASCAR and the racetrack wouldn't want every wall covered with the protective substance.

Jeff Gordon's violent crash at Las Vegas shook up everyone, and it made Raygan Swan realize that drivers need to focus on their physical health as much as they do on their cars.
But it also provoked something else: An astonishing level of insensitivity and sheer callousness toward a driver only out to better protect his own well-being. They wrote that Gordon was whining unnecessarily, that he had a "vendetta" against Matt Kenseth, that he had it coming because he caused the wreck to begin with. They claimed that NASCAR favors Gordon because it only looks into changes when he complains, and that he's a hypocrite for ever getting on the track to start with. It's disturbing that some people can take such a careless attitude toward human life.
Like J.K. in Delmont, Pa.: "I have seen a lot of drivers have much worse crashes than Jeff 'Golden Boy' Gordon. He has one crash that he walked away from, not injured and now he wants the tracks to do his bidding. Where was he when others crashed? It only has to be changed if it happens to [him]. NASCAR is being ruined with all the rules. Why not put the drivers in rubber cars so that they just bounce off each other. I saw Dale Earnhardt, Richard Petty, Rusty Wallace and many more, have worse crashes but they never asked the racetracks to make changes."
Or James in Tennessee: "This is just a smoke screen from the cry-baby. He was wrecking Matt Kenseth because he was faster than him and it backfired. I think he should be fined and docked points. He laughed when he said he didn't mean to get into Matt. What a phony."
And then there's that paragon of compassion, Betty from parts unknown: "Would there be any controversy regarding the barrier hit by Gordon if anyone else had hit it? Leave it alone. Maybe Gordon will get a second chance at it. Better yet, maybe it will get a second chance at Gordon."
This stuff leaves you at a loss for words. How anyone can dislike a driver to the point of wishing him physical harm is unthinkable. The fact is, the safety advances present in NASCAR today are there because drivers complained, because some sacrificed their careers or lives. This is not a proactive sport. It changes only after someone or something points out a deficiency, and Gordon did exactly that last Sunday. Virtually every driver in the garage would agree with him. So would guys like Jerry Nadeau and Bobby Allison, who suffered greatly because the life-saving technologies of today were not present then.
NASCAR and its racetracks should make every effort to ensure every wall is protected. Drivers should complain, and loudly, when they encounter something they believe is unsafe. And the "shut up and drive" crowd, so oblivious to the lessons of yesterday, should crawl back into their respective caves.