Re: Isn't this really?

"vox" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 15:54:37 GMT, Billy Chapel
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >Anybody and everybody will be back at Indy in May again, right?
> >
> >Series may have a different name, and a different man at the top, but
> >will actually be much the same as it was prior to 1996, right?
> >
> >So, in reality, "reunification" is happening by default, so why would
> >anyone be upset or angry about it?
>
> Because the IRL formula is less than exciting to me.  The all-ovals
> schedule is boring, the cars are butt-ugly, the engines are crap, and
> the number of severe injuries that have occured is alarming.  The
> quality of the drivers, the teams, the product, and the excitement of
> seeing the best drivers and cars has been lost.  The IRL is like
> shopping for shoes at Payless.  They might try to make the shoes look
> a little like Nikes, but everyone knows they are still generic shoes
> made in Bangladesh.

Where are Nikes made by the way?


 The IRL isn't the genuine item to me.
Oh, But Nikes are though. Ok, I got it now.

>
> Not only that, but some of us will never forget the mantra coming out
> of the IMS offices in the early years of 1996.  All of the premises
> under which the IRL was formed were false.  The IRL isn't full of
> american short track heros, has ride-buyers,  has engine leases
> controlled by the big-money teams, and the small teams can no longer
> compete.
>
> So the formation of the IRL and the incredible damage it has inflicted
> have benefited no one except a few small teams who got to compete in
> the late 90's and are now no longer able to compete.  It has relegated
> American open wheel racing to a status of being irrelevant in American
> sports culture.  Even the crown jewel, the Indy 500, has become a mere
> shadow of its former self.
>
> In short, "I am not buying it".  I don't think this series is
> equivalent to "pre-96" CART and I doubt I ever will.
>
> Scott K.