by FOXSports.com

Updated: February 27, 2008, 1:04 PM EST 159 comments

add this RSS blog email print

Consider the "news" that Auto Club Speedway president Gillian Zucker would consider changing the two-mile California speedway into a restrictor-plate track. This effusive exercise in the stenographic arts, courtesy of ESPN.com's Terry Blount, dutifully recorded a most creative suggestion from the fertile imagination of NASCAR Sprint Cup Series driver Michael Waltrip.

Whoever could give credence to such a cockamamie scheme might consider affixing a restrictor plate to their thought processes.

You want the truth about the track formerly known as California Speedway? Listen to what Jeff Hammond and Larry McReynolds of the NASCAR on FOX team have to say:

Hammond: What is the real problem with the track?

Jeff Hammond ( / FOX Sports)

The only place Michael Waltrip can run good is on restrictor-plate tracks — no wonder he wants to change the track at Fontana.

I don't agree with him, nor anybody else who thinks Auto Club Speedway should be turned into a restrictor-plate track. The idea is ridiculous.

This is a great job by Auto Club Speedway track president Gillian Zucker to try to cover up what the real problem is. I hate knocking anybody, but the problem that existed all weekend was the racetrack itself. I don't see where there was a problem with the racing — we had some good races throughout the course of the event. It was a problem with the weather and the racetrack.

I don't know what's going on here. I guess if you are going to put up a smokescreen, you better make it a thick one.

You should fix the existing problem, not try to create other problems by not wanting to admit your problems. I have yet to hear anybody say "Yeah, we had a problem and we need to address it."

What happened this weekend was a track problem but at the same time, you have to look a little bit at NASCAR because NASCAR's Rule Book clearly states that when they go into a venue, they take control of the racetrack. But this is something that should have been looked at and addressed long before we got there — that's why you have a track maintenance staff.

This weekend offered some of the best racing we've seen at the 2-miler, period. To me it's crazy that we're worrying about something that I don't think promotes good racing.

We have people complain about restrictor-plate racing at Daytona and Talladega. They complained about it when we had the one restrictor-plate race at New Hampshire International Speedway in July 2000. Why would you want to use restrictor plates at another track?

I guess my question is how does a restrictor-plate situation fix a wet racetrack?

What I saw in the Cup race at Fontana were guys battling side-by-side — and it happened for the lead with about 15 laps to go. In the middle and back of the pack was great two- and three-wide racing. I don't see what you are going to promote by using restrictor plates at this speedway.

What is the track trying to accomplish by making this suggestion? Do they think that by using restrictor plates, the cars are going to be in big packs like we see at Daytona and Talladega?

Daytona and Talladega are the only two racetracks I see right now where restrictor plates make sense. The new design has slowed the cars down, so I don't see the need for them.

McReynolds: Zucker should focus on fixing track

Larry McReynolds ( / FOX Sports)

Track promoters have nothing to do with rules of our cars. Never have, never will. Whether we run restrictor plates, which car we use, the gear rules, car changes ... no track promoter has any say in the competition side of our sport. NASCAR controls that.

We had one of the best California Speedway races that I can ever remember watching from the number of lead changes to the number of cars that were able to pass — both of which were record numbers. They don't need to do anything with the track. The only thing they have to do with California Speedway is fix their racetrack. We do not ever need to go through what we went through this past weekend — it was ridiculous.

What happened this weekend was nobody's fault. It really wasn't. They were caught off guard simply because of the amount of rain they had there.

But if we ever go back there and experience that again, it's nobody's fault but the racetrack's.

NASCAR did a phenomenal job this weekend, so did the racetrack. We were just the victim of a bad situation. Gillian Zucker does not need to worry about the rules of the race car, she just needs to worry about fixing her racetrack. We have good competitive racing right now. Michael Waltrip, who was quoted as the person offering the advice, needs to worry about getting his cars competitive and not worry about making the rules fit his situation.

Besides fixing the weeping, which I certainly hope they would do, I suggest perhaps adding a little more banking on that track.

The bottom line is we had a good race there (Monday). We had one of the best California races we've ever had.

The cars are going well over 200 mph into the corner, but the problem with this scenario is that we've tried restrictor plates at other places besides Daytona International Speedway and Talladega Superspeedway and it doesn't work. It never has worked.

We tested them at Texas Motor Speedway (a 1.5-mile venue with 24 degrees of banking) one time with Dale Earnhardt. All it does is make the straightaway speeds slower and make the corner speeds faster. It doesn't work.

Based on the race we had Monday, this type of change would be absurd ... I don't even know where these ideas are coming from. That's so far out there that it doesn't even make sense.