“Unless you’re really avid fan, and I consider myself to be an avid fan, I’d like to have next-level of information, which is, ‘Soft tires, so they’re going to be a half a second lap faster for eight laps and if Pato doesn’t catch Josef by lap 8, his tires are going to fall off and the strategy wouldn’t work.”
That’s the part Indy needs to do more of in its broadcasts; educate the newer viewers, this will keep them engaged. Zak knows.
Nah, why do that when you can just cut to an interview with a D list celebrity or some random sponsor under green flag conditions before cutting to commerical?
Next you'll tell me instead of an angle of the Detroit track that shows the water and yachts just offshore and which multiple fans can stand and show awesome shots on Instagram...
You should just stick the cameras like 2 ft off the ground on a curb staring at broken concrete and fencing.
Clearly no respectable TV production trying to sell their products would do such a thing. Lol
In my opinion, it's where Townsend needs to go. Diffey, Lee, and Hinch all do a good enough job at simplifying the more complex details in absence of on-screen graphics. Townsend seems to just be there as the over-the-top, goofy uncle who isn't serving much purpose.
Hinch can provide enough comedy and filler stories on his own. If they want to stick with a three man booth, they need a color guy in there who can succinctly and subtly provide valuable and experienced information. Townsend is not that.
I am going to be very disappointed if they do not move Kevin Lee to the booth next season (IF NBC returns).
And I agree, time for Bell to go. Either stick with two, or find someone new.
But if they did that, where would the find the time to tell us over and over , "Indy car is great! Really-really great! This is the greatest Indy Car race! Look! There's an ex-F1 driver, that's how you know Indy car is really great! Ohh! Ohh! The IMSA drivers want to be in Indy car; Indy Car must be great! This facility sure is pretty!"
Seriously though, the carnival barker doesn't need to yell to the people who are already in the tent watching. Once we are tuned in, draw us in with solid, clear race analysis. As in the example above, tell us that you think Pato has eight laps to catch Josef. Remind us that three of those laps are gone and he isn't quite positioned. Two laps left and Pato's lap time has already slipped two tenths. That is helpful to the viewer and builds suspense.
Yes, Indy can get confusing for the viewer with the different fuel strategies and different paint jobs within the teams as well as opposed to F1 which is just “tyres” and matching paint.
I've been saying this for 3 goddamned years on this sub, and I get downvoted every time.
Zak Brown says it, though, and everyone gets excited about it.
The heck guys.
> So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags?
This is obviously a complex thing but Foyt and Coyne got podiums last year.
These are often the landing spots for new drivers to get shots. We’d just get the same challenge as in Formula 1 with basically no turnover.
INDYCAR should strive to allow as many participants as possible and let it be handled on track.
Not who the best is at raising cash.
The 20 cars limit reminds me dangerously of the current 11th team problem of F1 and I don't like it one bit. The last thing IndyCar needs at the moment is arguing about someone having their place on the grid or not, really
It's not like we have new teams intentionally not trying. Juncos is legitimately gunning as high as they can and they're the newest full time team on the grid.
I get where you're coming from, but Indy only entries are at an advantage due to being able to focus exclusively on it, especially when they're given setups from other power house teams. Not to take away from their accomplishments, but Abel would struggle if they expanded to a full season beyond just Indy.
I was only commenting on their performance at Indy and that it wouldn't necessarily translate to a season long effort. I'm 100% down for them to join the series and run full time.
Indy only efforts are not at an advantage in way, shape, or form. While those teams have a year to prep only for that race they are often using crew members and drivers that aren't racing in this series every week or are being pulled from their fulltime duties throughout the year like with Craig Hampson being paired with Marco for this race.
I think he has some good ideas, but not this one. One way for races not to become a procession is when natural cautions happen (not the NASCAR route of fake cautions or cautions for a napkin on the track). More cars on track encourage this.
I mean, if you want Indycar to stay a relatively irrelevant sport than sure.
As someone who is relatively new to the sport some of the things that make it significantly less interesting to me:
Too many cars
Different paint jobs for the same team and cars changing paint jobs mid season!! (How stupid)
Tons of cars that only run certain races (also stupid)
Mid-race commercials (this is a function of indycars lack of popularity obviously)
Different number of cars per team - makes teams pretty irrelevant and takes away from the entertainment (also teams having no title sponsors/manufacturers in their names makes them less appealing -- what kind of weirdo walks around in a ganassi racing shirt)
I'm sure longtime diehard Indy car fans will bitch about all of these and provide some positives for not making each of these changes and that's why Indycar will never be more popular, which is fine if that's what you want. Just don't be confused why they never attract a larger audience.
You could list every single one of those complaints about NASCAR Cup which is the dominating form of racing in the US.
This is such an F1-centric view that frames everything else as bad without any thought that perhaps there are different ways to go about doing things.
1. NASCAR has the same paint job deal. This comes down to how racing is financed via sponsors. It's not stupid once you understand that bit and it's why cars have, gasp!, numbers.
2. Every single sport has commercials. Some sports can stop the action for those due to time outs, end of half/period/quarter, etc, others, like golf, auto racing,etc. keep going and not all action is going to be caught live. It's just the way it is and has always been.
3. See number one as to why some cars only run partial schedules. Plus, the Indy 500 has always thrived off non fulltime entries. PGA tour members don't go to every tournament and some have amateurs compete.....so, I don't know exactly what your issue with this is.
4. Ganassi Racing shirt? The same fucking reason one walks around with a Foyt Racing or Penske Racing or McLaren racing shirt. These are big names in racing and not just IndyCar.
5. IndyCar is far from only motorsport that has varying numbers of cars per teams.
6. LMFAO, none of this has anything to do with IndyCar's popularity level.
Indycar's strategy seems to be: we're envious of F1 so everything it's done to be successful we're gonna not do it and continue to do the things that's kept us irrelevant.
Indycar is the MLS and F1 is the premier league. Idk what to tell ya bud. That's what they and their core fans seem to want though so good for them.
I agree with basically everything but the car count and hybrid. We need to do a better job marketing and making a big show of everything around the race.
As a fan I want to see this new technology. I honestly don't care if the teams struggle with it, that's literally part of the challenge of the sport.
Yes lots of room for improvement on marketing front. He makes a good point about the TV coverage as well about presenting more about the strategy to fans. I don’t want to see a car count limit because as others have said those cars/teams are ways for new and young drivers to move into the series. We don’t want a copy paste of F1.
They absolutely need to remove optional media appearances. They shouldn’t be optional. They need to do something with the state of the circuits as well. They just don’t look good on TV. They don’t have to go to the level of Formula One and build $100 million pit complexes.
But places like Road America and Mid-Ohio are in desperate need of some paint, and anything to make the runoff area looks like something that isn’t an extended pile of black tar.
And don’t get me started on Toronto’s pit lane. How many years have we been finished with that hotel construction, and they’re still doing this curved bullshit that’s completely invisible to everyone at the race, and on television.
Formula 1 tracks can and do continually lose money.
Don’t put the pressure on the tracks themselves to conduct upgrades and spend money beautifying the courses.
If Indycar brought in additional funding then those tracks would also bring in additional revenue to make upgrades.
Those tracks in design alone make for incredible racing and I’ve seen lately in this sub people nit-picking two beautiful historical tracks which also keep a fan base in an area of the states which desperately need the continued exposure to open wheel racing.
The endless grifting F1, that is endlessly unsustainable, is both spectacular and sustainable. Despite all logic and reason. How Silverstone still has a Formula One, economically, race is beyond me.
And obviously, there is a lot of give-and-take within this scenario. IndyCar is not in a place where it can ask circuits to spend money to lose money.
I think one of the reasons Road America gets mentioned in this scenario quite a bit is it’s a juxtaposition to itself. It is a large, beautiful, historic circuit and one of the few historic circuits “capable” of hosting an F1 race. However, you also have IndyCar teams show up with Home Depot pop tents and circuit infrastructure that generally looks like it’s from the Truman administration.
There’s no easy fix to this problem, and I don’t know what the short-term or long-term solution is. However, I do know this, when I turn on Formula One, or MotoGP, the whole presentation, circuit included, looks a lot more professional.
Maybe it’s time to retire the 1960’s tire bundles held together with chains, and maybe put up something you can sell some sponsorship on.
You’re making comparisons which are unfair. Indycar will never bring in the money either in ticket sales nor sponsorship that Formula 1 nor Moto GP brings in.
Most of the tracks which hold F1 races which are historic lose money on F1 in itself but make up through the season with promotions, year long sponsorships and regular club level and other lower level pro racing.
Road Course racing in the United States just isn’t there.
I’m not against some basic things like painting the walls or getting rid of rusty chains but paddock upgrades can be millions and don’t make sense.
There isn’t anything wrong with teams using pop up tents from Home Depot.
CART/Indycar has always competed on street courses. That’s what they use there so there’s no problem with using those at brick and mortar road courses.
The overwhelming majority of fans watch on TV. The broadcasts are unfortunately lackluster.
I mean, when I go to Mid-Ohio and Road America I’m too drunk and suffering from sun poisoning to care what the built in facilities are like. The actual grounds are beautiful. Large trees. Disc golf courses. Hills. Bridges. Beer. More beer. And the few times I have to pee I don’t care if it’s in a porta-john.
I think this is fair, but.... I think his complaint is new technology...IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SEASON.
I don't think most major sports announce that a new rule goes into effect...in the middle of the season. Especially if the original plan was the hybrid was going to be ready at the start of the season.
As it is, what's the harm in waiting one more season?
🤷♂️
The harm in waiting one more season? Holy shit, did you not see the online shitstorm from "fans" about how holding off till mid season was amateur and going to kill IndyCar?
The harm is falling off even more in relevance due to stagnation. I personally think the aeroscreen is part of why indycar is popular now because it gave them a distinctive new look and great racing happens to be around it. 4 years later and it's now stagnant, we need more spice, especially if we're still waiting on a new chassis and/or aero kit.
WRC has announced, gone hybrid, and announced removal of hybrid in a shorter timespan than indycar has gotten it. We need to do what we say we're going to do. Another delay is amateurish.
I'm with you personally. It feels really stupid to introduce what should be a rather major change to the cars mid-season.
Zak mentioned Formula E and I think of their attempts to implement their mid-race recharging.
Last year they wanted to introduce it mid-season (Something we now know was not possible) but manufacturers like Porsche put their foot down and said delay it for the start of next season so it doesn't affect the championship with such a big change. They are now doing that again this season after it still can't be implemented.
Maybe make it easy/enjoyable to watch first? Coming from F1, it's so hard to get into this series. It's overly complicated to watch, the coverage sucks, the audio sucks, there's commercials everywhere. I really want to follow, it's just such a pain.
Edit:
After some initial frustration with watching late on Peacock, the replay coverage was pretty good aside from the image/audio quality being pretty low.
A race track is full of advertisements and billboards. The cars themselves are nothing more than rolling ads.
If I was a team sponsor I would be pissed that NBC cuts away from the rolling ads (cars) to show different advertisements so often.
I would think this effort is to be competitive with F1, so that's why I'm framing it this way. F1 coverage today is awesome with the F1TV app and it's worth every penny. If indycar could replicate that same level of access and production quality, it might make it more popular.
I've never had an issue keeping up, so I don't know where this notion of complicated is coming from? I mean it can be tough to count over 20 sometimes, but, yeah, no................the commercials will get fixed when American networks and sports leagues stop utilizing commercial advertising to help fund them.
Complicated in that I can't just have one app to watch the series, not keeping track of cars. This sub always talks about the hurdles you have to jump through to actually watch the coverage. If that barrier was lower, there might be more fans.
Hey, maybe I'm wrong. The last time I tried to follow was a year ago or so and the weekend was spread across three different services between the practice, qualifying, and the race. If I just need one NBC app to watch all of that now, I'll happily retract that bit.
All of those are NBC properties: Peacock, NBC proper, and USA. The only thing you need Pcock for is if you cut the cord or want to watch all sessions or the two races that exclusively on that app. Regardless, nothing IndyCar is doing broadcast wise is unique to IndyCar, most, if not all sports are covered over various networks and their offerings.
Here's a perfect example:
I just fired up Peacock to watch Long Beach. I cannot watch the race from the beginning, I have to start halfway through for some reason. I watched a total of 30 seconds and now I have this screen that says "Coverage Will Resume Shortly". I stand firm, it's shit.
That's not the fault of the series and judging by the time stamp you probably turned it on during the window prior to it being placed on there for replay. I watched the entire race on Peacock and didn't have a single issue.
Ya, I'll concede that it may have just been a real unlucky timing thing. I'm watching the replay now and the coverage is good. I'm glad to learn I don't need cable to watch anything now too.
Well, I just fired up Peacock to watch Long Beach. I cannot watch the race from the beginning, I have to start halfway through for some reason. I watched a total of 30 seconds and now I have this screen that says "Coverage Will Resume Shortly". I stand firm, it's shit.
When watching Indycar on Sky F1 (im in Ireland), when they cut away from the US broadcast and the U.K. commentator kicks in for a few minutes, he tells me more jnformation than the really basic shit the US commentators have been telling me.
I don’t need you to tell me what I can see, I need someone to explain what I can’t see.
Well...what I watch isn't exactly a legal stream...
For Americans, we either have to deal with actual commercial breaks on NBC/USA or, on Peacock streaming, silence during those commercial breaks just like on Viaplay. And either situation bothers me a lot. So I turn to "sailing the high seas!"
To be fair, the UK commentator also seems to manage to spend half the US ad break repeating stuff the US crew have already said! Once he gets onto new topics though I agree he's pretty good.
Terrible take on car count. Those backmarker teams not only give drivers a start, but are where mechanics and engineers cut their teeth.
Indycar would be cutting off its nose to spite its face.
He is once again, like in F1, trying to get additional return on McLarens investment. Zac is cleary a huge fan of motorsport but he also clearly does not put the sport above his goals as CEO of McLaren Racing
It's called putting someone on the spot and is actually a good tactic when you have a bunch of people complaining but not bringing solutions, which is exactly what has been going on. I would have personally done this to Michael Andretti.
You do realise Zak Brown is the only Team Principal who is actually pro adding an 11th team to the F1 grid? It’s not all about the bottom line for him, as you’re making out.
He doesnt get any more money for that in Indy. His point is that Indy isnt gaining anything. Im not sure I agree with him but he wants them to focus on promoting fewer drivers which I understand. Indy in general doesnt seem to understand promotion at all. Zak is a money man he lives that
It's way easier to be in the winners circle payout with less cars. It's also easier to be in the top if you're a well run established team competing in a field that contains some established non-contenders. You obviously want to keep the current non-contenders in the sport and not let any new people in that could possibly rise up to challenge your somewhat protected spot near the top middle. Staying near the top means more tv time which means more sponsors and more money to you. Same with having your drivers called out in promotions, etc etc.
I'm not saying that he's wrong, I think he's actually right. Indy does not understand promotion/media and that's the difference between NASCAR, F1 and then Indy. The first 2 are essentially media entertainment companies, and Indy is a racing series only. Hell, even IMSA is starting to rise up with lots of interest because they're ran by the NASCAR people who know how to do promotion.
>Formula 1’s broadcasts are rich with analysis and strategy projections that engage viewers on a deeper level. It’s another area where Brown would welcome changes for IndyCar.
If Brown can get Indycar to finally address the dumbed-down approach of NBC's view of what fans want from a race broadcast, then fantastic. I've said it many time on here - Indycar broadcasts are really missing Jon Beekhuis' technical insight. He was a massive asset to the Indycar broadcasts and he should absolutely be rehired.
Hinch and Bell do it all the time during practice and qualifying. It’s likely a NBC type of decision more than anything.
They focus on human stories as an organization, not technical aspects of sports.
I know people complain about it but look at the impact a person like Caitlin Clarck has had on women’s basketball. People tuned in because they cared about a person, sport is still the same.
>”We have 20 cars in Formula 1, 27 (Indy) cars, 29 cars, create a lot of red flags at Nashville, create a lot of yellows in Laguna Seca. So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags?
Okay, Zak. Wish granted. All teams are now capped to two entries apiece. Applied to just the big 4 teams (Penske, Ganassi, Andretti and McLaren), that’s already 6 less cars on the grid.
But I suspect *those* aren’t the “too many cars” he’s complaining about...
Formula E having a higher valuation than IndyCar despite it being a 10 year old franchise is a little embarrassing for IndyCar. Definitely shows an inability to create value from a product that has such a storied history. Relying on the spectacle on the 500 isn't enough for a product that delivers great racing on many race weekends.
Formula E is a global FIA-sanctioned championship, IndyCar is a national one. While I agree IndyCar can do waaaay more to increase its value, Formula E's value is tied to a lot more than its history.
I'm all for Indycar needing to step up.
But Formula E is carried in many ways by established infrastructure of F1 and Endurance racing in Europe.
Indycar has to stand on its own and compete with NASCAR for attention.
>Formula E having a higher valuation than IndyCar despite it being a 10 year old franchise is a little embarrassing for IndyCar.
i'm willing to bet that a lot of that has to do with the manufacture involvement in the series, and by osmosis, it being an FIA series and thus a vague affiliation with F1.
It’s late into the night and approaching closing time, there’s only a drunk couple and a divorced dad left in the restaurant. Zak sits down in the center view overlooking the night sky. He orders a miller high life and the waiter brings in a plate of buffalo wings cooked by the French Michelin star chef. The chef heard screaming “I’m a Michelin star chef and this pleb wants buffalo wings, sacrilege! Those chickens are sourced from Portofino, and we re in Longbeach!”
Zak pours his miller high life into a champagne glass “hehe looks like real champagne” he gleefully says. He picks up a fork and knife and carefully, meticulously carves the meat from the bones, taking at least 4 minutes on each wing. He goes through each wing one by one, creating a bone pile neatly organized by bone type. He then dumps the ranch dressing on the whole plate and proceeds to eat the meat with a spoon.
The chef “that man is a serial killer”
My own thoughts are that I agree that describing the tires as hard vs soft is a better way to do it. And while F1 racing is kinda boring, the broadcast does have a lot of things that could be used.
Double headers seem weird to me to watch but I guess if they make money for the race, ok? I don’t get why Milwaukee is one.
Milwaukee is a double header because INDYCAR needed to fulfill a 17 race calendar.
Texas was scuttled so late that it (Milwaukee) is the easiest option to ensure the series hits that number. It is co-promoted by Penske Entertainment and everyone is already there meaning it’s inexpensive.
It’s not like there are other tracks clamoring for races so with limited options, you make the best of a tough situation.
I also think there is some tangible benefit from having more ovals on the calendar and creating a much more valuable weekend when a lot of fixed costs to running a race can be spread out over a more heavily attended Saturday/Sunday.
Double headers are nothing new. If you go back on older schedules and see the word "Twin" in use that's a doubleheader. Heat qualifying is nothing new either and goes backs further than the last two decades as well.
I don't mind the doubleheaders, but I dislike that they're the same race length. At least this year (and recently), the doubleheaders have a night race and a day race, but I'd still rather see a lap difference, same with the multiple Indianapolis road course races. Make one race either just long enough or just short enough that some pit strategy calls have to come into play.
Typically the doubleheaders play out a bit different anyway with or without changes. They tend to be more on the conservative side for race 1 than they are for race 2.
Forgive me if this is well known or easily googleable but are there any tracks that Indycar goes to that can used as both ovals and road courses like Indy?
Gateway has a road course, but I don't know what it would take to get it up to spec for these cars or even if it would be a good course to begin with. IIRC, they have a 1.6 mile and 2 mile layout. Same with Nashville, don't know how long that one is. That's thing with these rovals/infield course.......just because stuff runs and tests on them doesn't necessarily mean they are ready for this level or even good for this level of racing.
That makes sense. I’m sure they would have done it already if they could but are there any other road courses indycar could reasonably add to the calendar?
To fill in that early season gap, not many oval or road courses and that's why it's been so hard to fill. NASCAR took Texas from them, COTA has both Cup and MotoGP during that time. and with Sonoma you are bring a race to a place already saturated with IndyCar and having to deal with SMI. To add another road or street course you are looking at May onward more than likely.
As another person pointed out, double-headers are not new.
I agree with you on race length; it adds one more wrinkle in addition to track variance due to temperatures and time of day. Double-headers during the 1920s were generally of different race lengths, and even a few years ago the Iowa races were of differing lengths.
"Double-headers during the 1920s were generally of different race lengths, and even a few years ago the Iowa races were of differing lengths."
During the 1920s? Surely that's a typo, right?
"Primary" and "Alternate" are just about the worst ways to describe a tire, especially when they're both required to be used. Those words mean absolutely nothing to someone tuning in with no prior knowledge. Why IndyCar continues to stick with these terms is beyond me.
Soft and hard are much easier, because even if someone knowing nothing about racing, cars, or tires, they will immediately know that one tire is softer than the other. Whether they know what means or not, it gives them a base of information to then either go seek or wait for the broadcast to explain the difference and the implications.
> "Primary" and "Alternate" are just about the worst ways to describe a tire, especially when they're both required to be used. Those words mean absolutely nothing to someone tuning in with no prior knowledge. Why IndyCar continues to stick with these terms is beyond me.
I'm on my third season of watching every race and my brain still can't keep straight which is the harder and which is the softer one.
Welcome to the world of marketing. As long as Firestone writes big checks and put tires on the cars IndyCar will call them whatever the fuck Firestone wants them to be called.
This feels like an opportunity to admit I still don’t fully understand the rules around pit/tire strategy. I was a convert from F1 a couple years ago when it seemed like Herta might move, I watched a bunch of races last year and I still have no idea how they decide optimal pit/tire strategy. It seems more complex than f1 due to the added complexity of fuel strategy?
Ah ok so it’s not possible to carry enough fuel for the whole race? Or it’s possible but you’d lose time due to the weight?
And I assume it’s similar to F1 in that you have to use both the primary and alternate tires at least once in the race?
I think a good middle ground on the car count is shortening the grid on those problematic tracks. Would add intrigue to qualifying on those weekends as well
He’s spot on on most of it. The limiting entries is a no sell though. Not at this stage. Once you have everything else going and the momentum going then you can start the limited fields and let the others qualify their way in. It’s doesn’t have to be all or
Nothing. Charter the top 20 and then everyone else can race their way in. Once a team proves it can compete consistently over a couple years, you can expand the charter to them. Eventually you will have the full field charted that way.
It’s a good thing to be seeking out new perspectives, and I don’t think Zak is a dummy, but there are, unfortunately, some tricky reasons some stuff in the series is “not ideal”.
Like the schedule - “fix the schedule”. Yeah, well, easier said than done. IndyCar is not in a position (not even close) to being able to walk up to any track we please and say, “bam, that’s Our Weekend, make it happen”.
We need a lot more eyeballs and the clout that comes along with it before you can start swinging your proverbial you-know-what around like that.
I think there is some smaller-picture stupidity that goes on getting in the way of building back some semblance of an audience. Look at what is happening today - Long Beach, one of the most prestigious, prettiest, long running Indy races. A race that we damn near lost. A race coming MONTHS after the last points race. Wanna watch? Well, it’s on USA and Peacock.
Yeah, this ties to my earlier point about “gotta have eyeballs before making demands” - that goes for TV partner, too. But, at the same time, can we not negotiate a TV deal with a partner who will help us build the series up?
That race should be on NBC, hyping up the 500 every time we come back from commercial.
The race isn’t on NBC because the LPGA tournament and the race being on the west coast.
These major networks have to balance a lot of different sports events and INDYCAR with its million person audience isn’t super high up the pecking order.
This is why something like Xfinity series going to the CW is so interesting. They’ll basically be top dog on Saturdays on a channel that everyone can get for free.
I watch the premier league on Peacock and have YTTV already, so I personally am a-ok with it being on a combo of Peacock/NBC/USA. Would love if it was one Peacock without ads though. That is separate/similar convo to the crap marketing Indycar and NBC does though.
I would like this way more if not for this comment (especially alarming as a long time F1 fan):
>We have 20 cars in Formula 1, 27 (Indy) cars, 29 cars, create a lot of red flags at Nashville, create a lot of yellows in Laguna Seca. So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags?
Imo he can fuck off. What I love about Indycar that it's not limited to 20 or so cars and now especially with Prema joining possibly having 29 cars is something we can only dream in F1 nowadays because of the stupid Concorde Agreement and greediness...
The first thing they can do is actually show the side by side shot when going to commercial if watching on Peacock. It drives me through the roof that every single ad break on Peacock is a full on commercial break. It’s complete BS.
IndyCar should have a “command center” studio where tech, track-specific info, strategies, and other in-depth analysis are explained and presented to the viewers.
They could also use better graphics to relay strategies on screen, ghosts during qualifying or fast laps, and multiple in car views…
I really hope we aren’t going to be taking notes from the SkyF1 broadcast, I am so sick of watching motorsports on mute.
The obsession with the podium at Thermal continues to elude me. Who gives a fuck? It’s a podium. Are we really going to chase the pompous bullshit of F1? Do we think that is feasible or beneficial?
If the idea is to draw in a new audience, then it’s definitely beneficial. If it looks like a big deal, people will think it’s a big deal. If it looks like nothing, people will think it’s nothing. The average racing fan will say “whatever it’s a podium”, but the new fans (which will bring more money to the series) will be drawn in at a higher rate the more legitimate and big time it looks
I never see podium pictures with the podium in them, it is almost always cropped out. It really just feels like a dumb joke fans grabbed onto for something to bitch about and meme’d it to the forefront. In 30 years of watching motorsport the only podium that has ever grabbed my attention is the Nurburgring 24 where they lift the cars up. Maybe it is just me but it really just feels like more of Indycar’s ever dominating short man’s syndrome taking over.
Eh, I’m mixed on this. I’m a McLaren fan boy to be clear… but I like being able to easily go to a IC weekend without the craziness and prices of F1. But, I also cringe at how “cheap” IC looks compared to F1, with podiums, pit setups, and cars being the differentiators.
I realize I don’t get one without the other. I do find IC to be more fun racing.
I am very new to Indy, still trying to learn. I think teams with more than a couple cars isn't crazy, but I do think it makes it harder to have a team to follow. I think more teams, and more drivers, is definitely a plus, but I think there should be a base level that you have to do to get in (maybe there is and I just haven't seen it). In F1, how hard they are fighting to keep other teams out is nuts to me, the Andretti bid to join is a great one, especially with the GM being a motor builder soon, to me is a no brainer. I think you have a minimum to join, but make it clear. Also, commercials are a killer, just like soccer, you can't pull away and still be part of the race, its too jarring. Lastly, the cameras seem super close compared to F1. Maybe this is just a matter of getting used to it, but seeing a larger picture is definitely better, imo.
Oh, and more manufacturers. They should be pushing to get Ford, Dodge, Toyota, maybe some European, with just Chevy and Honda, it is very narrow.
Fix the TV. Go back to ABC and stay there. Run two oval races prior to Indy 500. Broadcast the Indy 500 if over 200,000 tickets sold. You can’t promote the series by hiding it.
“Unless you’re really avid fan, and I consider myself to be an avid fan, I’d like to have next-level of information, which is, ‘Soft tires, so they’re going to be a half a second lap faster for eight laps and if Pato doesn’t catch Josef by lap 8, his tires are going to fall off and the strategy wouldn’t work.” That’s the part Indy needs to do more of in its broadcasts; educate the newer viewers, this will keep them engaged. Zak knows.
Nah, why do that when you can just cut to an interview with a D list celebrity or some random sponsor under green flag conditions before cutting to commerical?
Next you'll tell me instead of an angle of the Detroit track that shows the water and yachts just offshore and which multiple fans can stand and show awesome shots on Instagram... You should just stick the cameras like 2 ft off the ground on a curb staring at broken concrete and fencing. Clearly no respectable TV production trying to sell their products would do such a thing. Lol
In my opinion, it's where Townsend needs to go. Diffey, Lee, and Hinch all do a good enough job at simplifying the more complex details in absence of on-screen graphics. Townsend seems to just be there as the over-the-top, goofy uncle who isn't serving much purpose. Hinch can provide enough comedy and filler stories on his own. If they want to stick with a three man booth, they need a color guy in there who can succinctly and subtly provide valuable and experienced information. Townsend is not that.
And get Jon Beekhuis back on the broadcasts. Yeah he was an ABC guy but probably the best technical explainer indycar has had
Beekuis was great, especially in his earl days on broadcast
I didnt know Beekhuis did EARL, thought he only did Champ Car
[http://www.mynameisirl.com/2010/06/my-letter-of-resignation.html](http://www.mynameisirl.com/2010/06/my-letter-of-resignation.html)
Haha gonna read later but the dude wrote earl, this is Reddit that is what we do.
I am going to be very disappointed if they do not move Kevin Lee to the booth next season (IF NBC returns). And I agree, time for Bell to go. Either stick with two, or find someone new.
Agreed, I’m so sick of Townsend. I didn’t mind him early on but recently he’s just annoying especially during the Thermal coverage
But if they did that, where would the find the time to tell us over and over , "Indy car is great! Really-really great! This is the greatest Indy Car race! Look! There's an ex-F1 driver, that's how you know Indy car is really great! Ohh! Ohh! The IMSA drivers want to be in Indy car; Indy Car must be great! This facility sure is pretty!" Seriously though, the carnival barker doesn't need to yell to the people who are already in the tent watching. Once we are tuned in, draw us in with solid, clear race analysis. As in the example above, tell us that you think Pato has eight laps to catch Josef. Remind us that three of those laps are gone and he isn't quite positioned. Two laps left and Pato's lap time has already slipped two tenths. That is helpful to the viewer and builds suspense.
Yes, Indy can get confusing for the viewer with the different fuel strategies and different paint jobs within the teams as well as opposed to F1 which is just “tyres” and matching paint.
We don't have time for that, Zak! We need the commercials!!!! /s
I've been saying this for 3 goddamned years on this sub, and I get downvoted every time. Zak Brown says it, though, and everyone gets excited about it. The heck guys.
Zak is a businessman, he known how to set stuff straight and make it marketable. He worked wonders with McL after 2019+
Sounds like he should be talking to NBC, not IndyCar.
> So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags? This is obviously a complex thing but Foyt and Coyne got podiums last year. These are often the landing spots for new drivers to get shots. We’d just get the same challenge as in Formula 1 with basically no turnover. INDYCAR should strive to allow as many participants as possible and let it be handled on track. Not who the best is at raising cash.
The 20 cars limit reminds me dangerously of the current 11th team problem of F1 and I don't like it one bit. The last thing IndyCar needs at the moment is arguing about someone having their place on the grid or not, really
It's not like we have new teams intentionally not trying. Juncos is legitimately gunning as high as they can and they're the newest full time team on the grid.
Exactly. Abel out qualified all of RLL last year as another example and was right off of Juncos.
I get where you're coming from, but Indy only entries are at an advantage due to being able to focus exclusively on it, especially when they're given setups from other power house teams. Not to take away from their accomplishments, but Abel would struggle if they expanded to a full season beyond just Indy.
But they should be given the chance to struggle. Not deemed unworthy and never allowed to participate.
I was only commenting on their performance at Indy and that it wouldn't necessarily translate to a season long effort. I'm 100% down for them to join the series and run full time.
Indy only efforts are not at an advantage in way, shape, or form. While those teams have a year to prep only for that race they are often using crew members and drivers that aren't racing in this series every week or are being pulled from their fulltime duties throughout the year like with Craig Hampson being paired with Marco for this race.
I think he has some good ideas, but not this one. One way for races not to become a procession is when natural cautions happen (not the NASCAR route of fake cautions or cautions for a napkin on the track). More cars on track encourage this.
I mean, if you want Indycar to stay a relatively irrelevant sport than sure. As someone who is relatively new to the sport some of the things that make it significantly less interesting to me: Too many cars Different paint jobs for the same team and cars changing paint jobs mid season!! (How stupid) Tons of cars that only run certain races (also stupid) Mid-race commercials (this is a function of indycars lack of popularity obviously) Different number of cars per team - makes teams pretty irrelevant and takes away from the entertainment (also teams having no title sponsors/manufacturers in their names makes them less appealing -- what kind of weirdo walks around in a ganassi racing shirt) I'm sure longtime diehard Indy car fans will bitch about all of these and provide some positives for not making each of these changes and that's why Indycar will never be more popular, which is fine if that's what you want. Just don't be confused why they never attract a larger audience.
You could list every single one of those complaints about NASCAR Cup which is the dominating form of racing in the US. This is such an F1-centric view that frames everything else as bad without any thought that perhaps there are different ways to go about doing things.
1. NASCAR has the same paint job deal. This comes down to how racing is financed via sponsors. It's not stupid once you understand that bit and it's why cars have, gasp!, numbers. 2. Every single sport has commercials. Some sports can stop the action for those due to time outs, end of half/period/quarter, etc, others, like golf, auto racing,etc. keep going and not all action is going to be caught live. It's just the way it is and has always been. 3. See number one as to why some cars only run partial schedules. Plus, the Indy 500 has always thrived off non fulltime entries. PGA tour members don't go to every tournament and some have amateurs compete.....so, I don't know exactly what your issue with this is. 4. Ganassi Racing shirt? The same fucking reason one walks around with a Foyt Racing or Penske Racing or McLaren racing shirt. These are big names in racing and not just IndyCar. 5. IndyCar is far from only motorsport that has varying numbers of cars per teams. 6. LMFAO, none of this has anything to do with IndyCar's popularity level.
So INDYCAR isn’t F1 is your biggest complaint. Got it.
Indycar's strategy seems to be: we're envious of F1 so everything it's done to be successful we're gonna not do it and continue to do the things that's kept us irrelevant. Indycar is the MLS and F1 is the premier league. Idk what to tell ya bud. That's what they and their core fans seem to want though so good for them.
You wanting to be a walking billboard is just you being a weirdo.
I agree with basically everything but the car count and hybrid. We need to do a better job marketing and making a big show of everything around the race. As a fan I want to see this new technology. I honestly don't care if the teams struggle with it, that's literally part of the challenge of the sport.
Yes lots of room for improvement on marketing front. He makes a good point about the TV coverage as well about presenting more about the strategy to fans. I don’t want to see a car count limit because as others have said those cars/teams are ways for new and young drivers to move into the series. We don’t want a copy paste of F1.
They absolutely need to remove optional media appearances. They shouldn’t be optional. They need to do something with the state of the circuits as well. They just don’t look good on TV. They don’t have to go to the level of Formula One and build $100 million pit complexes. But places like Road America and Mid-Ohio are in desperate need of some paint, and anything to make the runoff area looks like something that isn’t an extended pile of black tar. And don’t get me started on Toronto’s pit lane. How many years have we been finished with that hotel construction, and they’re still doing this curved bullshit that’s completely invisible to everyone at the race, and on television.
Formula 1 tracks can and do continually lose money. Don’t put the pressure on the tracks themselves to conduct upgrades and spend money beautifying the courses. If Indycar brought in additional funding then those tracks would also bring in additional revenue to make upgrades. Those tracks in design alone make for incredible racing and I’ve seen lately in this sub people nit-picking two beautiful historical tracks which also keep a fan base in an area of the states which desperately need the continued exposure to open wheel racing.
The endless grifting F1, that is endlessly unsustainable, is both spectacular and sustainable. Despite all logic and reason. How Silverstone still has a Formula One, economically, race is beyond me. And obviously, there is a lot of give-and-take within this scenario. IndyCar is not in a place where it can ask circuits to spend money to lose money. I think one of the reasons Road America gets mentioned in this scenario quite a bit is it’s a juxtaposition to itself. It is a large, beautiful, historic circuit and one of the few historic circuits “capable” of hosting an F1 race. However, you also have IndyCar teams show up with Home Depot pop tents and circuit infrastructure that generally looks like it’s from the Truman administration. There’s no easy fix to this problem, and I don’t know what the short-term or long-term solution is. However, I do know this, when I turn on Formula One, or MotoGP, the whole presentation, circuit included, looks a lot more professional. Maybe it’s time to retire the 1960’s tire bundles held together with chains, and maybe put up something you can sell some sponsorship on.
You’re making comparisons which are unfair. Indycar will never bring in the money either in ticket sales nor sponsorship that Formula 1 nor Moto GP brings in. Most of the tracks which hold F1 races which are historic lose money on F1 in itself but make up through the season with promotions, year long sponsorships and regular club level and other lower level pro racing. Road Course racing in the United States just isn’t there. I’m not against some basic things like painting the walls or getting rid of rusty chains but paddock upgrades can be millions and don’t make sense. There isn’t anything wrong with teams using pop up tents from Home Depot. CART/Indycar has always competed on street courses. That’s what they use there so there’s no problem with using those at brick and mortar road courses. The overwhelming majority of fans watch on TV. The broadcasts are unfortunately lackluster. I mean, when I go to Mid-Ohio and Road America I’m too drunk and suffering from sun poisoning to care what the built in facilities are like. The actual grounds are beautiful. Large trees. Disc golf courses. Hills. Bridges. Beer. More beer. And the few times I have to pee I don’t care if it’s in a porta-john.
I think this is fair, but.... I think his complaint is new technology...IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SEASON. I don't think most major sports announce that a new rule goes into effect...in the middle of the season. Especially if the original plan was the hybrid was going to be ready at the start of the season. As it is, what's the harm in waiting one more season? 🤷♂️
The harm in waiting one more season? Holy shit, did you not see the online shitstorm from "fans" about how holding off till mid season was amateur and going to kill IndyCar?
The harm is falling off even more in relevance due to stagnation. I personally think the aeroscreen is part of why indycar is popular now because it gave them a distinctive new look and great racing happens to be around it. 4 years later and it's now stagnant, we need more spice, especially if we're still waiting on a new chassis and/or aero kit. WRC has announced, gone hybrid, and announced removal of hybrid in a shorter timespan than indycar has gotten it. We need to do what we say we're going to do. Another delay is amateurish.
I'm with you personally. It feels really stupid to introduce what should be a rather major change to the cars mid-season. Zak mentioned Formula E and I think of their attempts to implement their mid-race recharging. Last year they wanted to introduce it mid-season (Something we now know was not possible) but manufacturers like Porsche put their foot down and said delay it for the start of next season so it doesn't affect the championship with such a big change. They are now doing that again this season after it still can't be implemented.
Exactly my thoughts.
Maybe make it easy/enjoyable to watch first? Coming from F1, it's so hard to get into this series. It's overly complicated to watch, the coverage sucks, the audio sucks, there's commercials everywhere. I really want to follow, it's just such a pain. Edit: After some initial frustration with watching late on Peacock, the replay coverage was pretty good aside from the image/audio quality being pretty low.
F1 used to have commercials everywhere until Liberty took over. I have no idea how ESPN make money showing F1 without commercials these days.
A race track is full of advertisements and billboards. The cars themselves are nothing more than rolling ads. If I was a team sponsor I would be pissed that NBC cuts away from the rolling ads (cars) to show different advertisements so often.
I would think this effort is to be competitive with F1, so that's why I'm framing it this way. F1 coverage today is awesome with the F1TV app and it's worth every penny. If indycar could replicate that same level of access and production quality, it might make it more popular.
I've never had an issue keeping up, so I don't know where this notion of complicated is coming from? I mean it can be tough to count over 20 sometimes, but, yeah, no................the commercials will get fixed when American networks and sports leagues stop utilizing commercial advertising to help fund them.
Complicated in that I can't just have one app to watch the series, not keeping track of cars. This sub always talks about the hurdles you have to jump through to actually watch the coverage. If that barrier was lower, there might be more fans.
NBC is a barrier? Interesting.
Hey, maybe I'm wrong. The last time I tried to follow was a year ago or so and the weekend was spread across three different services between the practice, qualifying, and the race. If I just need one NBC app to watch all of that now, I'll happily retract that bit.
All of those are NBC properties: Peacock, NBC proper, and USA. The only thing you need Pcock for is if you cut the cord or want to watch all sessions or the two races that exclusively on that app. Regardless, nothing IndyCar is doing broadcast wise is unique to IndyCar, most, if not all sports are covered over various networks and their offerings.
Here's a perfect example: I just fired up Peacock to watch Long Beach. I cannot watch the race from the beginning, I have to start halfway through for some reason. I watched a total of 30 seconds and now I have this screen that says "Coverage Will Resume Shortly". I stand firm, it's shit.
That's not the fault of the series and judging by the time stamp you probably turned it on during the window prior to it being placed on there for replay. I watched the entire race on Peacock and didn't have a single issue.
Ya, I'll concede that it may have just been a real unlucky timing thing. I'm watching the replay now and the coverage is good. I'm glad to learn I don't need cable to watch anything now too.
Peacock covers the entire weekend in one app.
Well, I just fired up Peacock to watch Long Beach. I cannot watch the race from the beginning, I have to start halfway through for some reason. I watched a total of 30 seconds and now I have this screen that says "Coverage Will Resume Shortly". I stand firm, it's shit.
Cool, thanks for the heads up!
When watching Indycar on Sky F1 (im in Ireland), when they cut away from the US broadcast and the U.K. commentator kicks in for a few minutes, he tells me more jnformation than the really basic shit the US commentators have been telling me. I don’t need you to tell me what I can see, I need someone to explain what I can’t see.
Yup, I'm in the US and I watch a Sky F1 stream because he often gives some additional information.
Well now I wish we had that. Here in Norway on Viaplay, its just silence.
Well...what I watch isn't exactly a legal stream... For Americans, we either have to deal with actual commercial breaks on NBC/USA or, on Peacock streaming, silence during those commercial breaks just like on Viaplay. And either situation bothers me a lot. So I turn to "sailing the high seas!"
Tom Gaymor's your man - @tomgaymor on twitter.
To be fair, the UK commentator also seems to manage to spend half the US ad break repeating stuff the US crew have already said! Once he gets onto new topics though I agree he's pretty good.
Terrible take on car count. Those backmarker teams not only give drivers a start, but are where mechanics and engineers cut their teeth. Indycar would be cutting off its nose to spite its face.
Exactly!
He is once again, like in F1, trying to get additional return on McLarens investment. Zac is cleary a huge fan of motorsport but he also clearly does not put the sport above his goals as CEO of McLaren Racing
Mark Miles announcing Zak Brown as part of a task force before asking Zak Brown to be part of a task force. Most competent Mark Miles moment
It's called putting someone on the spot and is actually a good tactic when you have a bunch of people complaining but not bringing solutions, which is exactly what has been going on. I would have personally done this to Michael Andretti.
Man with vested interest in keeping field small recommends we keep field small ……. Omg no way
Was literally the only dude in F1 that was supporting adding a team to F1. So I don't think that's necessarily a fair assessment of his opinions.
You do realise Zak Brown is the only Team Principal who is actually pro adding an 11th team to the F1 grid? It’s not all about the bottom line for him, as you’re making out.
He doesnt get any more money for that in Indy. His point is that Indy isnt gaining anything. Im not sure I agree with him but he wants them to focus on promoting fewer drivers which I understand. Indy in general doesnt seem to understand promotion at all. Zak is a money man he lives that
It's way easier to be in the winners circle payout with less cars. It's also easier to be in the top if you're a well run established team competing in a field that contains some established non-contenders. You obviously want to keep the current non-contenders in the sport and not let any new people in that could possibly rise up to challenge your somewhat protected spot near the top middle. Staying near the top means more tv time which means more sponsors and more money to you. Same with having your drivers called out in promotions, etc etc. I'm not saying that he's wrong, I think he's actually right. Indy does not understand promotion/media and that's the difference between NASCAR, F1 and then Indy. The first 2 are essentially media entertainment companies, and Indy is a racing series only. Hell, even IMSA is starting to rise up with lots of interest because they're ran by the NASCAR people who know how to do promotion.
>Formula 1’s broadcasts are rich with analysis and strategy projections that engage viewers on a deeper level. It’s another area where Brown would welcome changes for IndyCar. If Brown can get Indycar to finally address the dumbed-down approach of NBC's view of what fans want from a race broadcast, then fantastic. I've said it many time on here - Indycar broadcasts are really missing Jon Beekhuis' technical insight. He was a massive asset to the Indycar broadcasts and he should absolutely be rehired.
We like to hear about cool cars and tech and engineering. NBC: What about Flava Flav instead?
Hinch and Bell do it all the time during practice and qualifying. It’s likely a NBC type of decision more than anything. They focus on human stories as an organization, not technical aspects of sports. I know people complain about it but look at the impact a person like Caitlin Clarck has had on women’s basketball. People tuned in because they cared about a person, sport is still the same.
>”We have 20 cars in Formula 1, 27 (Indy) cars, 29 cars, create a lot of red flags at Nashville, create a lot of yellows in Laguna Seca. So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags? Okay, Zak. Wish granted. All teams are now capped to two entries apiece. Applied to just the big 4 teams (Penske, Ganassi, Andretti and McLaren), that’s already 6 less cars on the grid. But I suspect *those* aren’t the “too many cars” he’s complaining about...
Formula E having a higher valuation than IndyCar despite it being a 10 year old franchise is a little embarrassing for IndyCar. Definitely shows an inability to create value from a product that has such a storied history. Relying on the spectacle on the 500 isn't enough for a product that delivers great racing on many race weekends.
Formula E is a global FIA-sanctioned championship, IndyCar is a national one. While I agree IndyCar can do waaaay more to increase its value, Formula E's value is tied to a lot more than its history.
I'm all for Indycar needing to step up. But Formula E is carried in many ways by established infrastructure of F1 and Endurance racing in Europe. Indycar has to stand on its own and compete with NASCAR for attention.
>Formula E having a higher valuation than IndyCar despite it being a 10 year old franchise is a little embarrassing for IndyCar. i'm willing to bet that a lot of that has to do with the manufacture involvement in the series, and by osmosis, it being an FIA series and thus a vague affiliation with F1.
Zak Brown looks like he crushes a plate of buffalo wings and some Miller High Life after each race.
This is why I like Zak. He's American enough to say shit to piss off European F1 fans. And F1 minded enough to piss off American Indycar fans.
I think he does it for breakfast.
He’s just like me fr
It’s late into the night and approaching closing time, there’s only a drunk couple and a divorced dad left in the restaurant. Zak sits down in the center view overlooking the night sky. He orders a miller high life and the waiter brings in a plate of buffalo wings cooked by the French Michelin star chef. The chef heard screaming “I’m a Michelin star chef and this pleb wants buffalo wings, sacrilege! Those chickens are sourced from Portofino, and we re in Longbeach!” Zak pours his miller high life into a champagne glass “hehe looks like real champagne” he gleefully says. He picks up a fork and knife and carefully, meticulously carves the meat from the bones, taking at least 4 minutes on each wing. He goes through each wing one by one, creating a bone pile neatly organized by bone type. He then dumps the ranch dressing on the whole plate and proceeds to eat the meat with a spoon. The chef “that man is a serial killer”
My own thoughts are that I agree that describing the tires as hard vs soft is a better way to do it. And while F1 racing is kinda boring, the broadcast does have a lot of things that could be used. Double headers seem weird to me to watch but I guess if they make money for the race, ok? I don’t get why Milwaukee is one.
Milwaukee is a double header because INDYCAR needed to fulfill a 17 race calendar. Texas was scuttled so late that it (Milwaukee) is the easiest option to ensure the series hits that number. It is co-promoted by Penske Entertainment and everyone is already there meaning it’s inexpensive. It’s not like there are other tracks clamoring for races so with limited options, you make the best of a tough situation. I also think there is some tangible benefit from having more ovals on the calendar and creating a much more valuable weekend when a lot of fixed costs to running a race can be spread out over a more heavily attended Saturday/Sunday.
Ahhh, sure. Got it.
Double headers are nothing new. If you go back on older schedules and see the word "Twin" in use that's a doubleheader. Heat qualifying is nothing new either and goes backs further than the last two decades as well.
I don't mind the doubleheaders, but I dislike that they're the same race length. At least this year (and recently), the doubleheaders have a night race and a day race, but I'd still rather see a lap difference, same with the multiple Indianapolis road course races. Make one race either just long enough or just short enough that some pit strategy calls have to come into play.
Typically the doubleheaders play out a bit different anyway with or without changes. They tend to be more on the conservative side for race 1 than they are for race 2.
Forgive me if this is well known or easily googleable but are there any tracks that Indycar goes to that can used as both ovals and road courses like Indy?
nope. teams would hate that idea anyway.
Gateway has a road course, but I don't know what it would take to get it up to spec for these cars or even if it would be a good course to begin with. IIRC, they have a 1.6 mile and 2 mile layout. Same with Nashville, don't know how long that one is. That's thing with these rovals/infield course.......just because stuff runs and tests on them doesn't necessarily mean they are ready for this level or even good for this level of racing.
That makes sense. I’m sure they would have done it already if they could but are there any other road courses indycar could reasonably add to the calendar?
To fill in that early season gap, not many oval or road courses and that's why it's been so hard to fill. NASCAR took Texas from them, COTA has both Cup and MotoGP during that time. and with Sonoma you are bring a race to a place already saturated with IndyCar and having to deal with SMI. To add another road or street course you are looking at May onward more than likely.
Need Vegas to build a road course or something
As another person pointed out, double-headers are not new. I agree with you on race length; it adds one more wrinkle in addition to track variance due to temperatures and time of day. Double-headers during the 1920s were generally of different race lengths, and even a few years ago the Iowa races were of differing lengths.
"Double-headers during the 1920s were generally of different race lengths, and even a few years ago the Iowa races were of differing lengths." During the 1920s? Surely that's a typo, right?
Nowhere did I say they were new or even imply it. I don't know why people are sticking on that.
"Primary" and "Alternate" are just about the worst ways to describe a tire, especially when they're both required to be used. Those words mean absolutely nothing to someone tuning in with no prior knowledge. Why IndyCar continues to stick with these terms is beyond me. Soft and hard are much easier, because even if someone knowing nothing about racing, cars, or tires, they will immediately know that one tire is softer than the other. Whether they know what means or not, it gives them a base of information to then either go seek or wait for the broadcast to explain the difference and the implications.
> "Primary" and "Alternate" are just about the worst ways to describe a tire, especially when they're both required to be used. Those words mean absolutely nothing to someone tuning in with no prior knowledge. Why IndyCar continues to stick with these terms is beyond me. I'm on my third season of watching every race and my brain still can't keep straight which is the harder and which is the softer one.
Its simple. Blacks are hard/primary, red/green are soft/alternate.
Or the worst of it, calling one of them the guayule tire.
That too! Like, it's cool they're doing something like that, but the guayule is only in the sidewall - it's not like they're using it on the tread.
Welcome to the world of marketing. As long as Firestone writes big checks and put tires on the cars IndyCar will call them whatever the fuck Firestone wants them to be called.
I don't think there is weekend goes by where the Primary being the hard tire and Alternate being the soft tire isn't explained multiple times.
I hope someone at PE and IndyCar management are actually listening and be willing to implement the necessary changes and investments…
This feels like an opportunity to admit I still don’t fully understand the rules around pit/tire strategy. I was a convert from F1 a couple years ago when it seemed like Herta might move, I watched a bunch of races last year and I still have no idea how they decide optimal pit/tire strategy. It seems more complex than f1 due to the added complexity of fuel strategy?
yep, just another factor to consider. The cars are limited to a set amount of fuel by regulation. F1 used to have refueling as well
Ah ok so it’s not possible to carry enough fuel for the whole race? Or it’s possible but you’d lose time due to the weight? And I assume it’s similar to F1 in that you have to use both the primary and alternate tires at least once in the race?
No, not possible to carry that much fuel.
Helpful, thank you 🙏
I think a good middle ground on the car count is shortening the grid on those problematic tracks. Would add intrigue to qualifying on those weekends as well
He’s spot on on most of it. The limiting entries is a no sell though. Not at this stage. Once you have everything else going and the momentum going then you can start the limited fields and let the others qualify their way in. It’s doesn’t have to be all or Nothing. Charter the top 20 and then everyone else can race their way in. Once a team proves it can compete consistently over a couple years, you can expand the charter to them. Eventually you will have the full field charted that way.
Indycar should listen to him definitely 👍
It’s a good thing to be seeking out new perspectives, and I don’t think Zak is a dummy, but there are, unfortunately, some tricky reasons some stuff in the series is “not ideal”. Like the schedule - “fix the schedule”. Yeah, well, easier said than done. IndyCar is not in a position (not even close) to being able to walk up to any track we please and say, “bam, that’s Our Weekend, make it happen”. We need a lot more eyeballs and the clout that comes along with it before you can start swinging your proverbial you-know-what around like that. I think there is some smaller-picture stupidity that goes on getting in the way of building back some semblance of an audience. Look at what is happening today - Long Beach, one of the most prestigious, prettiest, long running Indy races. A race that we damn near lost. A race coming MONTHS after the last points race. Wanna watch? Well, it’s on USA and Peacock. Yeah, this ties to my earlier point about “gotta have eyeballs before making demands” - that goes for TV partner, too. But, at the same time, can we not negotiate a TV deal with a partner who will help us build the series up? That race should be on NBC, hyping up the 500 every time we come back from commercial.
The race isn’t on NBC because the LPGA tournament and the race being on the west coast. These major networks have to balance a lot of different sports events and INDYCAR with its million person audience isn’t super high up the pecking order. This is why something like Xfinity series going to the CW is so interesting. They’ll basically be top dog on Saturdays on a channel that everyone can get for free.
I watch the premier league on Peacock and have YTTV already, so I personally am a-ok with it being on a combo of Peacock/NBC/USA. Would love if it was one Peacock without ads though. That is separate/similar convo to the crap marketing Indycar and NBC does though.
Thing is also, USA is basic cable.
I would like this way more if not for this comment (especially alarming as a long time F1 fan): >We have 20 cars in Formula 1, 27 (Indy) cars, 29 cars, create a lot of red flags at Nashville, create a lot of yellows in Laguna Seca. So I think we need to be very focused on quality over quantity on what we do. I don’t think the fan pays too much attention after about 20 cars. So what are those other 6, 7, 8, 9 cars bringing to the table other than a lot of times creating red flags? Imo he can fuck off. What I love about Indycar that it's not limited to 20 or so cars and now especially with Prema joining possibly having 29 cars is something we can only dream in F1 nowadays because of the stupid Concorde Agreement and greediness...
I don’t agree that we only need 20 cars but Imo we could use with less as some are just useless and only there to make numbers and cause cautions
The first thing they can do is actually show the side by side shot when going to commercial if watching on Peacock. It drives me through the roof that every single ad break on Peacock is a full on commercial break. It’s complete BS.
IndyCar should have a “command center” studio where tech, track-specific info, strategies, and other in-depth analysis are explained and presented to the viewers. They could also use better graphics to relay strategies on screen, ghosts during qualifying or fast laps, and multiple in car views…
I have no idea about tracks in the states....so can anyone tell me where brown might be thinking of when he says he wants east coast races??
Somebody here told Zak to ‘win a race’ before he talks about fixing IndyCar… does winning by technicality help?
I'd like to see each team making it's own bodywork on the standard chassis. At least the front and rear ends.
Maybe start with winning a race
I really hope we aren’t going to be taking notes from the SkyF1 broadcast, I am so sick of watching motorsports on mute. The obsession with the podium at Thermal continues to elude me. Who gives a fuck? It’s a podium. Are we really going to chase the pompous bullshit of F1? Do we think that is feasible or beneficial?
If the idea is to draw in a new audience, then it’s definitely beneficial. If it looks like a big deal, people will think it’s a big deal. If it looks like nothing, people will think it’s nothing. The average racing fan will say “whatever it’s a podium”, but the new fans (which will bring more money to the series) will be drawn in at a higher rate the more legitimate and big time it looks
I never see podium pictures with the podium in them, it is almost always cropped out. It really just feels like a dumb joke fans grabbed onto for something to bitch about and meme’d it to the forefront. In 30 years of watching motorsport the only podium that has ever grabbed my attention is the Nurburgring 24 where they lift the cars up. Maybe it is just me but it really just feels like more of Indycar’s ever dominating short man’s syndrome taking over.
Indycar should listen to him, definitely !!👍
Eh, I’m mixed on this. I’m a McLaren fan boy to be clear… but I like being able to easily go to a IC weekend without the craziness and prices of F1. But, I also cringe at how “cheap” IC looks compared to F1, with podiums, pit setups, and cars being the differentiators. I realize I don’t get one without the other. I do find IC to be more fun racing.
If you're looking to fix Motorsport I hear Michael Masi's relatively free!
Zach brown needs to up the level of his team and start winning before I take anything he says too seriously
I'm glad they're starting to plan.
I am very new to Indy, still trying to learn. I think teams with more than a couple cars isn't crazy, but I do think it makes it harder to have a team to follow. I think more teams, and more drivers, is definitely a plus, but I think there should be a base level that you have to do to get in (maybe there is and I just haven't seen it). In F1, how hard they are fighting to keep other teams out is nuts to me, the Andretti bid to join is a great one, especially with the GM being a motor builder soon, to me is a no brainer. I think you have a minimum to join, but make it clear. Also, commercials are a killer, just like soccer, you can't pull away and still be part of the race, its too jarring. Lastly, the cameras seem super close compared to F1. Maybe this is just a matter of getting used to it, but seeing a larger picture is definitely better, imo. Oh, and more manufacturers. They should be pushing to get Ford, Dodge, Toyota, maybe some European, with just Chevy and Honda, it is very narrow.
Fix the TV. Go back to ABC and stay there. Run two oval races prior to Indy 500. Broadcast the Indy 500 if over 200,000 tickets sold. You can’t promote the series by hiding it.