Forum: HoseHeads Sprint Car General Forum (go)
Moderators: dirtonly  /  dmantx  /  hosehead

If you say McCarl isn't worthy (I'm not on the nominating or voting panel, so I have no say anyway, but I agree, I don't think he is either), when you just look at #'s (wins, sanctioned wins, titles, etc.), his #'s are as good or possibly BETTER than Shuman, Kauffman, Kreitz, etc..

My point by using him was the competition to be enshrined is VERY tough.  IMO, NO ONE is a "shoe-in" to get enshrined anymore.  You take people's personal opinions about certain drivers out and only look at the data (wins, sanctioned wins, track or touring series titles, etc.) and it becomes VERY tough.  And it's even harder to differentiate when you have "regional" racers like Kreitz, Kauffman, McCarl & Rahmer and you are comparing their #'s to "national" drivers like Wolfgang, Swindell, Jeff Swindell, Haudenschild, etc.  Who's overall #'s are gonna look better (wins, track titles are gonna skew to the "regional" racers and the big $$ race wins and Sanctioned races wins are gonna skew toward the "national " racers)?  Makes it WAYYYYY tougher to decide when you start breaking it down.

When you look at drivers from the 1960's and 1970's it gets even tougher as the big $$$ races pretty much were non-existent, everyone worked a "regular job" and some of those guys would win 20 races a year despite having sub-par equipment and racing less than half as much as the racers do today (that's where it gets really tough).  if driver "A" has 100 wins, 5 track titles but was killed racing at the age of 27 (and only races 6 or 7 years) and driver "B" has 125 wins, 5 track titles, but has races for 25+ years, who is more deserving?  I'd go with the former myself while I'm sure others would go with the latter because they are a more recognizable name.

IMO, the Hall of Fame should alter their process again and make it so that you have to be voted for by 90% of the voters and you only vote based on the data (no names attached).  Would there be years where no driver gets enshrined?  Yes, but being enshrined would mean that much more too.

What may be pulling Krietz down is that he's had a lot of down years since his glory period, and may be seen as a driver who can only win on the dry slick tracks.

Didn't Mark Kinser get passed over in his 1st year eligible?

I disagree vande77, there is a "shoe-in" running right now, Schatz. He goes in 1st year, should be no question.

As to ever thing else you said, I fully agree. It's always tough to compare eras of sports. Would it be easier if eligibility was based on a era criteria? Did a driver stand out against his peers, as compared to how he stacks up agianst drivers through the years.

I'll throw another log on the fire, what about someone like Kyle Larson? He was definately building a HOF career in my opinion, and may actually already have completed it. A ton of big race wins, a couple of pretty dominating years and has at least one series title to his name. Can a driver make it in on an 5-6 year resume? What if he runs a few more races a year and picks up a big win or two, does a "part time" sprint car guy get in?

I agree, Schatz is probably the only "shoe-in" that currently exists, but you never know, he may go through a down period where he doesn't win and someone else may "rise up" and become the man to beat (although I can't think of anyone that impressive currently).

Agree about Larson, he moved on to bigger (maybe better) things in racing.  Were those 5-6 years impressive (YES).  But 30 years from now when he's eligible will anyone remember seeing him race sprint cars?  I think some will, but some won't and it will make it hard for him to get in.

Same goes for Tony Stewart except he continues to "dabble" in them which keeps him in the forefront of people's minds as he nears his mid-40's.  Will he be a "shoe-in"  in 5-6 years?  I don't know, but based on his USAC record, he probably should be.

Stew69 said that The Donald is a LOCK for the HOF and he's forgotten more about sprint car racing than I'll ever know...

Granted, the reason he's forgot more about racing than I'll ever know is, he was pretty shit faced when he forgot that stuff... :/  

Opinions may vary...

I believe this is the first year Mark was nominated (just being retired 5 years or turning 50 doesn't put you on the ballot.  Someone has to submit you to be considered by the nominating committee.

Heck, Robert Bell is probably 50 years old, that doesn't put him on the list for the nominating committee to sift through.  if it did, it would take YEARS before they could narrow the list down to 70 or so for the voters to choose from as there are TONS of guys that raced a few seasons that have now turned 50. 

Someone has to submit them and their accomplishments (although the bigger names are always going to be remembered, guys that were only racing a few years are easily forgotten).  If we just went by the drivers people remember seeing race, none of the old-timers would ever get enshrined and that would be a shame.

Of those 49 listed above in the thread, I think there are only 14-15 drivers listed and some of those are pre-1945.

Mark Kinser didn't even make the ballot in his first year of eligibility last year.  That was a travesty in my opinion. 

I don't agree with 90% of the voters having to agree to be enshrined.  The Hall of Fame is supposed to help us celebrate our sport, and it has done a great job of that.  It is a balancing act though.  You only want the best and most deserving people to get in, but we want to get people in the Hall to celebrate it. 

Eric Arnold
Social Media Manager & Track Historian
Knoxville Raceway

Everything I can find shows Mark Kinser's birthdate being May 5, 1964 which means he wasn't eligible until THIS YEAR and he got elected unless the last race he ran was in 2008 or before (I can't remember when it was when he finally hung up the helmet).

As far as the 90% goes, it's just a #, but anyone on the voting committee should be voting for those that actually DESERVE it.  If you can get elected with less than 50% voting for you (it's happened) something is broken that needs to be fixed.  But, if you don't have a certain % as a barometer, it's just a matter of time before those that definitely are not Hall of Fame material get elected because it's their first time eligible and others got forgotten or they are the best of the ones not inducted (which is not what a Hall of Fame should be IMO - it's for the "best of the best", not the "best of those eligible").

McCarl a local?  Locals don't win WoO events in FLA, Williams Grove, Knoxville, California and points in between.  Locals don't win in 17 sanctions and 18 states.  He's won two World Series races Down Under with limited opportunities.  Kreitz, Rahmer and other Posse belong in the Hall but on a National level.  They can't say those things.  McCarl stands above them on a national scope before you even talk about his promotions and track titles.  He's done it for a living for a long time with a lot of miles logged independently, with the WoO and All Stars...he's eligible and will go in the '16 class IMO.

If this post isn't results, stories or something c
constructive, it isn't me! 
@BillWMedia
www.OpenWheel101.com

Mark has been eligible for a couple of years and has been nominated.  He just didn't make the final ballot until this year.  Five years out gets you eligible.  We do have a new system that went in place this year requiring a %.  It's best not to say anything if you don't know the facts...

If this post isn't results, stories or something c
constructive, it isn't me! 
@BillWMedia
www.OpenWheel101.com

Like I stated above, I wasn't sure when Mark's last race was, so I didn't know if he was eligible by 5 year retirement rule, but I know for FACT he wasn't eligble by age alone until this year or next (he turns 50 in a week or two).

none of the press releases the hall of fame put out said anything about a %.

I stated that IMO, I thought you should be on 90% of the ballots to get enshrined, I had no idea that they instituted a % rule or what that % is, but there should be a % rule (otherwise you can have 5 guys that all appear on 10% of the ballots.  if only 10% of the voters feel you're Hall of Fame material, you definetly aren't (at least for that year).

Like I stated above a few times, when you look @ the #'s, McCarl's are more impressive than Kreitz and Rahmer (and probably a host of others).

Do I personally feel he's Hall of Fame material?  No, but as I stated before, I'm not a voter or on the nomination board so my my feelings don't really matter.

Are there guys that deserve it from eras gone by that keep getting passed over?  I'm sure there are as some of those guys careers were cut short by injury or death (the sport was a lot less safe back then).  Their win #'s may not be what some of today's stars have, but their winning % is probably greater.

Kevin Eckert wrote an excellent blog a few years ago about guys who deserve to get into the Hall. I think Kreitz warrants inclusion, but two drivers more deserving IMHO are Frankie Kerr and Richard Griffin. The fact that Mark Kinser wasn't inducted on the first ballot is a sham and a shame. Two World of Outlaws titles, three Knoxville Nationals wins and a Kings Royal crown should be enough to warrant first ballot induction. When Glen Fitzcharles was inducted, the legitimacy of the voting process showed obvious flaws. No disrespect because he had a good career in both sprints and modifies, but Fitzcharles shouldn't be in the Hall of Fame.

Ok, you completely over looked the "Regional" part. McCarl is a great driver, but when compared to Blaney and Kreitz I was trying to make the point of... Blaney traveler, McCarl Regional and Kreitz local. Perhaps that would be a good categories in the future. And the question was who would go in first of the 3, I say Blaney and it is not even close. I am not saying McCarl should not go in, what you missed again was the use of him to make a point. Do you think Charlie Fisher is worthy at some point in time? IMO I believe he is.

And of the 3 that we're mentioned, who has 1. Traveling points titles 2. Crown jewel wins?

This is a great debate and please don't take me as being crappy, I love every opinion. I had the pleasure of growing up around some of these guys, and think 99% of drivers are fantastic. Sammy is the 1% haha

McCarl not worthy of the Hall of Fame, that sits on turn 2 of the track he dominated over for around a decade? I think your stretching it.  McCarl hate goes way too far sometimes, (even though you said you root for him). Without doing any research he probably has about 10 track championships between Husets and Knoxville.  A couple of stints on the WoO tour, 10 wins on that tour, 360 Nationals title, 3-5 Podium finishes at Knoxville. I assume he's 2nd All-Time Knoxville feature wins.  

He's in first chance he as would be my guess.

We shouldn't need a separate category for locals and journeyman.  It's still Sprint Car Racing.  Not everyone gets the opportunites that others get.  DKjr stayed home because he had no reason to leave PA and possiblly no opportunity.  Not everyone can balance the bottom $ like Bobby Allen nor maybe do they want to.

Clint Garner, another HofF calliber driver - 5 360 track championships in a row at Knoxville, a driver from SD who only drives Saturdays at Knoxville, for example just chooses not to do more than he's doing.  Some of these drivers still treat it like a hobby and work other jobs during the week.  

Speaking of how old is Ed Lynch, Jr another driver who should be in when eligible - surprisingly only has 1 WoO, but doesn't mean he's not a HoFer.  The local drivers only get so many chances to grab WoO wins, which makes it more impressive when they do imo.

Blaney isn't any more of a traveler than McCarl.  They've both had a few stints on the WoO tour.  But the all-stars are a regional traveling group basically between 2 states.  On top of that the depth at Knoxville on a weekly basis is stronger than the depth of the All-Stars whenever they aren't racing in PA.  

McCarl also has more WoO wins than Blaney.  I think they both should be in, but you can't say one gets in and the other doesnt.   Their resumes are almost identical

Maybe I missed this....been a long winter...good picks

http://www.sprintcarhof.com/Article/502

I thought you had to very accomplished on the national level to get in the hall.

he hasnt demonstated on a national level for years and years he is HOF bound

He has proven to be nothing more then a good racer that has beaten Wrecker drivers, junkyard owners and locals.

take out his lucky as hell Kings Royal that he inherited, i got the dvd to prove it and what has he done outside of Pa????

great driver but not HOF worthy

I'd love to see Sonner's win/loss ratio compared to Bud Grimm's.  They might as well turn the place into a food pantry.

Luna's Ford engine style that won 2 WoO titles and 3 
Kings Royals before a weight rule against the best EVER
in their prime and now DOMINATES super dirt late model
racing is no longer allowed/wanted in a WoO sprint
car.... Was Luna a miracle worker?

Forgot to add he tried NASCAR racing.  You act like he just beats joe shmoes and not quality cars.  

Hey dirtlover, I'm not sure why I'm even entertaining this but are you seriously talking that way about Kreitz?  I understand they were in PA but he has WoO wins at Port Royal, Lincoln and a handful or more at William Grove including the National Open. That's not even mentioning WoO wins outside of PA-Hagerstown, Eldora and possibly a few others(not positive but can find out if there were others).  The man has won 2 of arguably the 3 biggest crown jewel sprint car events and whether you say the King's Royal was lucky or whatever, I'd say to be lucky, you need to be in the right position to be able to receive that said luck you speak of.  I have a VHS copy of that race and would argue about it being so lucky, luck has a part in any athletic event, sometimes to a heavier degree then other times but again, you need to be in position to realize that luck.  Does Fred Rahmer not deserve to be in the HoF in your opinion?