Smack: Final thoughts on Edwards vs. Keselowski

1. Carl Edwards got three races of probation for his retaliatory hit on Brad Keselowski on Sunday. Did he deserve more?

David Caraviello: Did he deserve more? Probably. Was he going to get more? Doubtful. The truth is, NASCAR has let this kind of thing go on for years. A suspension would have been a stark departure from one of the few precedents NASCAR holds fast to. Anyone hoping for a suspension was fooling themselves.

Joe Menzer: Yes. There are logical reasons -- well, logical for NASCAR -- why he wasn't suspended. But I believe Keselowski was correct in stating after the race that Carl should have received at least a one-race suspension. I wrote that in a post-race column and still feel that way.

Mark Aumann: This was a litmus test of where NASCAR sees itself and where it wants to be in the realm of big-time sports, and whether its "have at it, boys" mandate was hypocritical. So I'm not surprised. I am disappointed, though.

Joe Menzer: Here is why he deserved to be suspended: you shouldn't be allowed to get away with deliberately wrecking someone on a straightaway when speeds are approaching 190 mph -- and what made it worse was that he was 150-some laps down. It was foolish and far too dangerous.

A different look

TNT analysts Wally Dallenbach and Kyle Petty break down the wreck that was at AMS.

• More

Mark Aumann: Maybe NASCAR doesn't think so, but I think it really opens up a Pandora's Box. Who's to say an owner doesn't hire a start-and-parker to intentionally wreck the points leader at a critical juncture? Whether or not Brad deserved it, it was just a foolhardy thing to do under the circumstances, and NASCAR missed an opportunity to prove that point.

David Caraviello: They're clearly backed into a corner here. As I wrote in my Wednesday column, guys have taken each other out for years either to win races or get revenge, and in almost every case NASCAR has let it go with no serious long-term penalties. And yet, they clearly look bad here, because of how many laps down Carl was, and how Brad's car flipped through the air. Non-racing sports writers and talk radio hosts are coming down on them very, very hard, almost universally so.

Joe Menzer: The severity of the wreck clearly made this an emotional, hotly-debated topic. I have never seen fans this riled up on an issue that didn't involve Dale Jr. or Danica Patrick in the three-plus years I've been working here. Not even when Carl's own car almost went into the grandstands at Talladega last spring, I don't think.

Mark Aumann: And I hear all this "well, Dale used to do it all the time" stuff. But I can't find an instance anywhere in his career where Earnhardt was multiple laps down and intentionally wrecked a car in the top 10. Sorry, that boat doesn't float. In fact, back in the "good old days," guys were cognizant of how seriously you could get hurt in a wreck. I think a lot of the aggressive driving stems from the fact that some of these guys think they're bulletproof now.

David Caraviello: Mark, I agree. But the bottom line is, Dale didn't get penalized when he took people out. Neither did Brad or Denny Hamlin last year, or Tony Stewart or Juan Montoya last year. There are a million similar incidents, and no penalties. That's what they're standing by. That's the reality, which leads me to put the onus more on Carl than on NASCAR. NASCAR has always let this kind of stuff go. Drivers are usually more judicious in how they do it.

Joe Menzer: I still think Carl should have just waited until Bristol, where he could have exacted some sort of revenge at a much slower, safer speed. Carl's contention that he might have "collected other cars" there is true, but that doesn't float, either, because he certainly affected other cars with his actions Sunday -- which brought out the caution and caused the double G-W-C finish.

David Caraviello: Wait until whenever -- Bristol, Martinsville, a month from now. Wait until the time and situation are right, and then do it. Then you're a folk hero, and not someone who made a rash, poorly-executed decision.

Joe Menzer: I like Carl, but what he did was stupid and foolish. It was just flat-out wrong -- and way too dangerous. I know he didn't intend for Brad K. to go airborne, but when you wreck someone at those speeds going down a straightaway, you can't control and don't know what is going to happen.

Mark Aumann: Yeah, Carl comes off as the bully here, whether that's deserved or not. And will this incident cause him to gain or lose respect from other drivers? That remains to be seen. There were very mixed reviews about the incident Sunday and then NASCAR's decision on Tuesday.

Joe Menzer: Whether it's deserved or not? Um, it's deserved. No matter what you think of Brash Brad -- and obviously he has A LOT to learn about the give-and-take of Cup racing -- Carl played the role of bully to the hilt Sunday and, frankly, deserves the heat he is taking. But I do think he'll learn from it and be smarter about controlling his emotions from here on out.

David Caraviello: No question. But there are also a lot of people -- judging from the comments on Carl's Facebook statements -- who unfortunately think this is some righteous old-school throwback. No it's not. Guys like the Intimidator were smarter than this. This was an embarrassing situation all the way around.

Joe Menzer: Well, we've explained why he deserved more than the three-race probation slap on the wrist he received. But here's why expecting a suspension for one race was never going to happen: Edwards runs a fully-funded car with a big-time sponsor who would not have been happy about sitting out even one race.

Mark Aumann: And don't forget the Chase implications. But my biggest concern -- and NASCAR's, too -- is the way the roof deformed after the hit with the SAFER barrier. I held my breath until I heard Brad on the radio. That, and the Ryan Newman incident at Talladega, have to be keeping the R&D guys up at night. The roll cage integrity is imperative.

David Caraviello: As is the airborne problem. Those are the real issues coming out of this. (Continued)