Stock Suggestion # 1

[Mark Yacavone]

Two administrative positions should be created at NHRA, for the specific purpose of maintaining the health of Stock Eliminator and Super Stock as performance based categories. They should be responsible for forming and overseeing a committee that shall include 5 positions held by racers who shall be elected by their peers for one year terms, 3 positions, each held by a representative from each manufacturer, and 3 positions, each held by representative from a contingency sponsor, selected for a one year term. The committee should meet quarterly, the current SRAC should provide input from the racers directly to the entire committee, the contingency sponsor representatives should provide input from the contingency sponsors as a whole, directly to the entire committee, obviously, the factories have their input via their representatives. My suggestions for those two NHRA positions to start with would be Wesley Roberson, and Len Imbrogno. The complete minutes, as well as any and all votes, (which shall be non binding) of these quarterly meetings shall be published, in their entirety, in the next edition of the National Dragster, and immediately in the Competition section of the NHRA website.

Alan ,I see these committees, using currently active racers ,as a conflict of interest issue.

Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course, a racer submits an issue to the committee:
He has an A/SA car that was qualified at Indy until the class winners are inserted into the final Q sheet, thereby bumping him down to DNQ status.
He suggests changing the long standing format to a straight low qualifier program.
The committee of racers just happens to all have high class cars in the heavily populated classes, who may themselves benefit from such a change one day. There's a good chance of this, because it seems that that's all there is nowadays.
What do you know? The change gets voted in.
This is a strictly hypothetical example , of course.

I would say , at a minimum, the committee should be made up of members who are not actively racing during the current said calendar year.

[Alan Roehrich]

Originally Posted by Mark Yacavone

Alan ,I see these committees, using currently active racers ,as a conflict of interest issue.

Let's say, hypothetically speaking of course, a racer submits an issue to the committee:
He has an A/SA car that was qualified at Indy until the class winners are inserted into the final Q sheet, thereby bumping him down to DNQ status.
He suggests changing the long standing format to a straight low qualifier program.
The committee of racers just happens to all have high class cars in the heavily populated classes, who may themselves benefit from such a change one day. There's a good chance of this, because it seems that that's all there is nowadays.
What do you know? The change gets voted in.
This is a strictly hypothetical example , of course.

I would say , at a minimum, the committee should be made up of members who are not actively racing during the current said calendar year.

Mark, that is exactly the reason why I suggested the committee vote be non binding. The committee is merely a collection of representatives from the groups involved, the racers, the sponsors, and the manufacturers.