|05/01/18||A Point of Dispute|
|04/25/18||A Helping Hand|
|04/19/18||They Will Not Wait|
|04/11/18||No One Else Wants Change|
|03/28/18||Here's to a Revival|
|03/22/18||A Geographical Gem|
Is winner-take-all the right approach to the Chase?
I've made my feelings pretty clear about the winner-take-all finale at Homestead. I don't like it.
The biggest reason I've cited for my dislike of the format is that there will be 39 other cars out there who can influence the outcome. The rest of the year; the rest of the Chase, in fact, drivers aren't being put into a one-and-done situation. Everything accumulates over a matter of weeks.
At New Hampshire, Morgan Shepherd was nice enough to give my concerns a real example to cite. By most accounts, Shepherd was running (on the edge of) too slow and inconsistent lines. Regardless of how Shepherd wants to spin it, that certainly contributed to the wreck that took out second-place running Joey Logano.
Now, let's imagine that was Homestead. And, it doesn't have to be Shepherd we're talking about. Logano represents one of the four title contenders. Let's say he's Junior. There's a heck of a lot at stake (especially monetarily to the driver, crew, owner and sponsors) to have his championship dreams snuffed out by a driver who makes a bonehead move or two.
Yes, that's always been a danger in the finale; but you could always play the "what if" game from previous weeks. There won't be a "what if" game at Homestead this year; I just hope we won't have a "what was he thinking?" game instead.