Cliff's Notes: Stech: I witnessed the fall of Nascar firsthand, working in sales/marketing with them. I went to races everywhere and saw the fan support drop off a cliff. It happened because TV coverage changed such that the emphasis became only on a handful of teams/drivers. Pylons: I watched races as much as anyone. Most on TV, some in person. I didn't see the change in coverage, so that explanation doesn't make sense. Stech: Prove it with facts! You don't have facts in your argument. I don't have facts in mine. I don't think numbers exist that would give any insight into network TV coverage emphasis. It seems like your experience might lend some really interesting and compelling support for your argument...like if you saw a sponsor drop a team or ad spots because the TV coverage emphasis changed (not because ratings dropped...the drop happened, the reason is where our disagreement lies). But stories like that are absent. I can't prove you wrong any more than you can prove yourself right (which applies in the other direction as well). It's a difference of opinion. I'd suggest the reason lies in changing demographics that Nascar couldn't keep up with, the loss of compelling driver personalities/rivalries, and the sterilization of the racing through rule changes...not in how TV covers the sport. Not sure I've ever heard anyone else suggest that TV argument. Curiously, even though you're blaming TV, you don't even mention watching on TV...just attending races. Google AI doesn't suggest anything like you suggest. It does suggest things I just noted. Here's a link to a pretty well-written piece about the decline of Nascar from someone who was also immersed in it...the only mention of TV coverage basically just says that there were far too many commercial breaks to keep fans interested...nothing about the coverage emphasis with respect to drivers/teams. @Stech ** Edited by Pylons at 7/19/2025, 12:14:01 PM