Debate: NASCAR's burning questions
— -- Our experts weigh in on four of the biggest questions in NASCAR this week:
Turn 1: Chase 3.0 has been riveting at times, but is it fair considering how unforgiving and even random it has been in booting out season-long performers? And if it isn't fair, should anyone care?
Ricky Craven, ESPN NASCAR analyst: Each of the 16 drivers knew the circumstances and the format nine races ago, so I have to say it's fair. As far as should we care or not about the format being equitable for all drivers? That will be determined by the paying customer, the fans of our sport. Up to this point the new Chase seems to have generated a lot of enthusiasm, excitement and curiosity. But the past three days my Twitter account has been filled with opposition to the idea that a driver could have two second-place finishes, one flat tire ... and miss the cut?
Brant James, ESPN.com: The Sprint Cup champion is being decided by a tournament laced with gimmicks. So is the champion of every other major sport. That doesn't make it right. It just makes NASCAR like everybody else, and that has seemingly been the point since the Chase was introduced in its first form a decade ago. Tournaments aren't fair and their champions are not necessarily the greatest, as determined by performance over the duration of a long season. There will be stories such as Florida Gulf Coast and the Kansas City Royals. A modern champion's worth, as viewed by leagues and sanctioning bodies attempting to titillate fans, appears to be in the survival, not the demonstration of long-term greatness. So, no, the Chase is not fair. It is random and discounts consistency and subtle excellence, and it encourages boorish behavior and absurd spectacle. But if it's not being embraced by the majority of fans and media, its proponents are vocal enough to present the impression that it is being embraced. And it is, so it seems, here for a while. Are you not entertained?
Ryan McGee, ESPN The Magazine: Forget fair. It's the postseason. Teams get hot and teams run cold, and they are rewarded accordingly. In the end, this final four looks like most NCAA basketball Final Fours. In Joey Logano and Kevin Harvick, we have two teams that were clearly dominant and among the best four or five teams all season long. In Denny Hamlin, we have a Cinderella story of a driver and team that has overcome injury, slumps and even a suspended coach (crew chief Darian Grubb). And in Ryan Newman we have the "Wait ... how the heck did they get here?" team. Just like a Davidson, Butler, etc. In the end, the complaining is about brand names. If Gordon makes it in, 90 percent of the complaining isn't there. But guess what? He didn't make it. So stop.
John Oreovicz, ESPN.com: At Phoenix, Denny Hamlin said something like: "The people who think this system is bad are the ones whose favorite driver didn't make it." And he's right. Fair or not, it's the system that everyone had to plan for, and the four teams advancing to the Championship Round are the ones that played the new system the best. After 35 races, we've learned that no matter how much NASCAR emphasizes winning, points racing still works. Homestead will pit two guys who were regular winners up against a pair of consistent point collectors. That's fair, isn't it?
Turn 2: If you're one of the four drivers competing for a title Sunday, which approach is better -- offense or defense?
Craven: Without question ... offense! At least until the closing laps. Offense is what got you in this position and you can't deviate from what got you there. Besides, if you're one of the four drivers with a chance at the title, you could accept losing the title knowing you at least emptied the tank, so to speak, and gave it everything you had. But you couldn't accept losing the title because you were too conservative, two cautious.
James: This Chase has shown over and over that hesitation breeds failure and aggression breeds success. The first nine races presented a theme and a cautionary tale. Kyle Busch riding in the eye of the hurricane at Talladega to preserve a second-place points standing? Crashed out and done. Ryan Newman needing one spot and one point at Phoenix? Get it by any means necessary, and sorry to you, Kyle Larson. It makes no sense for a driver to worry about anything but what he can control, and in this case it's getting to and staying at the front. Let everyone else react. In a situation certain to be frenzied, a perception of control, even if unfounded, could be crucial.
McGee: Offense. After spending all week at Joe Gibbs Racing and spending a lot of time with crew chief Darian Grubb on Tuesday, I know that's their plan. And that's also the beauty of this new setup. Whether you love it or hate it, you can't argue with the simplicity of the math. Go beat the other three. I, for one, have not missed the once-familiar "To clinch the title, so-and-so must finish 23rd while so-and-so finishes eighth or worse..."
Oreovicz: Offense. You've got to go out there and try to win the race. Bad things tend to happen to drivers who are tentative and hang back. Bring your A-game and may the best man (and team) win.
Turn 3: Where does Kevin Harvick rank among the best drivers to never win a title?
Craven: Behind only Mark Martin, who I consider one of the five best drivers I've ever competed against. Having also competed against Harvick, I felt for years that he was destined to win a NASCAR Sprint Cup Series title, and I believe he has never been better than he's been this year. Leading over 2,000 laps certainly supports that view. If the team executes the fundamentals -- qualifies well, has solid restarts and has no mistakes on pit road -- then Harvick on Sunday night will officially remove himself from this list forever.
James: In good -- as in good and frustrated -- company: (1) Mark Martin, 40 Cup wins, second in points five times; (2) Harvick, 27 Cup wins, third in points in three times.
McGee: He's top-five, easy. I've always had Fred Lorenzen on that short list, and Harvick just passed the newly elected Hall of Famer on the all-time wins list. I've said this about him before. He's like Harold Baines or Curtis Martin. When Harvick retires, we'll look at his stats and say, "Whoa! He did all of that?" If he wins the Cup on Sunday, that element of surprise goes away.
Oreovicz: I'm with the majority who believe that Mark Martin is the undisputed No. 1 on this list, but Harvick is in the discussion for the next few positions. Kyle Busch has produced similar statistics but hasn't been around as long as Harvick, and I don't think it's fair to compare drivers from radically different eras, which takes the likes of Fred Lorenzen and Junior Johnson out of the equation. For now, I guess Harvick is the best active driver who hasn't won a title, but I suspect that's about to change on Sunday.
Turn 4: If you could throw one wild-card driver into the final, who would it be?
Craven: Jeff Gordon. With the exception of two flat tires -- one in New Hampshire, one in Charlotte -- he has been outstanding in this year's Chase. In fact, in each of those two races Gordon was running top-five when the problem occurred. His performance in 2014 is certainly worthy of a championship.
James: Tough one, but Jeff Gordon, and not just to continue his streak of wild-card accommodation to two seasons. The four-time champion has been sterling all year, right through the final round of the Chase with two second-place finishes and a possible win erased at Texas by Brad Keselowski's dive-bomb attempt at victory. It seemed that this campaign would culminate in something special for a driver whose last title came in 2001.
McGee: Keselowski. Because we know he'd do whatever it took to win. And it would have been fun to see the fan base rage about him all week.
Oreovicz: Tough question. My three candidates are Jimmie Johnson, because he's the gold standard of the Chase era; Brad Keselowski, because he's Mr. Excitement; and Jeff Gordon as the sentimental favorite. Take Gordon, because who knows how many more title runs he will get to make in the latter years of his career.
