by Lee Spencer

France reiterated his forecast that NASCAR as an industry "would not be immune to the effects of a tough economy." France added the sanctioning body would work with its "partners" — particularly the auto manufacturers that have remained in the headlines over the last month with news of mergers and other survival strategies as earning announcements grow bleaker in Detroit.

"We're also not going to live or die if one manufacturer or another has a pullback or a pullout," France said. "I hope it doesn't happen. We're working like mad to make sure it doesn't. And it wouldn't be our first choice by any stretch. But the sport is on very, very solid ground that transcends one manufacturer or another. That's how you have to look at it.

"I think we have been as aggressive as anybody, even when we got criticism for looking at opening up to either foreign manufacturers or anyone else. But we're going to continue to do that because we think the manufacturing component has a very big important additive thing to this sport. And we're going to keep working with our partners even when they're in challenging times."

France said he and president Mike Helton have recently met with executives from Ford, General Motors, Chrysler and Toyota to not only understand their plights but how it directly affects the teams, particularly in regards to financial and technological support.

After GM announced a third quarter loss of $6.9 billion on Friday and the possibility of running out of funds in 2009, GM's NASCAR program manager Pat Suhy did not mince words.

"It's dire right now," Suhy said. "We're doing everything we can to make sure what we're doing is sensible and moving us in the right direction."

Suhy said his department "has outlined steps to manage our cash position" and added that GM has had to review its budgets and scrutinize its plans closer now than ever before. However, he doesn't believe that Friday's announcement will affect GM's long-term goals in NASCAR.

"We have long-time commitments in the garage and when you've got contractual commitments there are things you have to do," Suhy said. "Every time we spend the money we have to ask, 'Where does this get us? How does this help to achieve our investments?'"

On NASCAR's end, France believes the sanctioning body itself can control costs by mandating specific rules packages and testing policies.

"We need to be more aggressive than we've ever been in taking cost out of the system," France said. "We're always aggressive. That's always a core requirement on our part.

"But there is that difference. You don't want NASCAR as the league or organization to be running around cutting a bunch of things that have a long-term impact. That the thing we've got to be careful about if you're us, because a lot of those things we've had for a long time and have had a big investment in."

Under Big Bill's watch, competition consisted of a "run what you brung" stock car series that featured cars that could come fresh from the showroom. Certainly, there were modifications to these automobiles, but a Lincoln looked like a Lincoln, an Oldsmobile looked like an Oldsmobile and a Plymouth looked like a Plymouth.

Today's race cars are anything but stock. And the farther the cars have come from the original designs in Detroit the more expensive the models are to build. In the late 1990s, as Dodge reemerged in NASCAR after a 20-year absence, the sanctioning began moving towards common templates which inevitably evolved into the Car of Tomorrow — the biggest boondoggle in the sport's history.

France said he's "very happy with the three principles we set out — which were safety, cost containment and competition" for the new car. However, by most accounts only the safety aspect of the COT's goals has been achieved. No competitor has been seriously injured since the new car was introduced last year — even after some bone-jarring crashes — but the competition, particularly on intermediate tracks is mediocre at best. On top of that, the costs of research, testing and fabrication have skyrocketed.

France added he was proud that the sanctioning body "didn't cave to pressure" when owner and manufacturers advocated for changes in May after teams struggled to get a handle on the car.

"That would have done two things," France said. "It would have cost the teams a lot more money because we would have in theory moved the rules around, right? And made them chase something else. That costs money every time we do that."

But if France is serious when he says "back to the basics" racing means "back to the focus on what happens on the track" he needs to concentrate on "The Show." With the exception of Dover, the Chase hasn't been all that. Just ask ABC, who opted to run the banal "America's Funniest Videos" over the final 35 laps of NASCAR's ninth playoff race because of time constraints.

Competition must be closer. Carl Edwards lapped all but 11 cars at Texas. Jimmie Johnson put more than half of the field a lap down on Sunday at Phoenix. Yes, there were years when 82 cars filled the roster at Darlington and only one finished the race on the lead lap, but that was 57 years ago. Of the 12 drivers that have won this season, those cars came from just six organizations. There has not been a single first-time winner. And of the 12 drivers in the Chase, only four organizations are represented.

NASCAR must use the best assets at their disposal — the talent in the garage. The sanctioning body has relied on organizations and manufacturers for research and development in the past, particularly on the new car. But NASCAR must also heed the suggestions of the owners and manufacturers and work in concert with those partners — including sharing the costs — before moving forward. The wealth of cutting edge knowledge among the teams far outweighs the limited resources in NASCAR's Research and Development Center.

As Suhy said on Friday, "Historically, there have been science projects — things that you do that have been nice to do — that you may or may not see any benefit from in the near term. We're just going to have to start prioritizing and managing it closer than we ever have to make sure that what we do makes sense."

Minor modifications to the car, such as returning to conventional suspensions like on the Nationwide cars and outlawing bump stops, would reduce the engineering in that area considerably and offer parity among teams.

And NASCAR is currently reevaluating its testing policy. Originally, 24 tests per team was the number floated at a crew chiefs' meeting at New Hampshire last summer. That number more recently has dropped to 18 tests. But in the wake of the recent economic developments, teams are starting to lobby for no testing at all. It appears that the only testing of the season would be held in January for the Daytona 500.

To cut back on time, travel and costs, the best short-term solution is to test Friday at the track the teams are racing at that weekend and use the information to dial in the cars for qualifying and the race.

Owner Rick Hendrick, who is currently leading the Sprint Cup point standings, says if NASCAR decides to put a moratorium on wide-scale testing it would be cost-effective. Hendrick believes the option is feasible as long as there are no significant changes to the new car before Daytona.

"If we have to go with no tests, I'd like to see them bring us in on Friday with the data acquisition on the car and two good practices, take it off Friday, that night, qualify Saturday, race Sunday, and eliminate tests," Hendrick said. "We're going to do whatever they decide. It's a lot of money when you test as many times as we tested and everyone else has tested. But I think rolling over this year with this car, as much work as has been done on it, if they don't make a lot of wholesale changes in the off-season with rules, then we should be okay.

"I think the whole world has been impacted by the economy, and we're going to be just like everybody else. We'll live with whatever they come up with, but it sounds to me like they're leaning toward very few tests and maybe none, but I think the data acquisition will help a ton like in the Truck Series. I think it will give everybody that shows up, Goodyear is there, all the teams are there, we've got to get in on Thursday anyway, so I think it'll save everybody a lot of money."

France estimates that eliminating testing "could pull out $30 or $40 million out of the operating budgets collectively to the industry". A move like that would definitely be a place to start.

"That's a great thing to do," France said. "All those things are taken into consideration, and when we say we're going to be now more aggressive, I think the economic times make us have to weigh that perhaps differently, and we will."