Bob, we need to find you something to do.
Eddie, I like some of the ideas. Some others I do not find feasible now or in the future.. This is not an endorsement nor meant to be as any sort of attack on any one, candidate, or otherwise. They are my thoughts and opinions. As a candidate/fellow racer/enthusiast I hope you (and anyone else) find something useful from this.
1)Tiered Qualifying: about time. 2007 sounds like a good time to start this.
2)Minor local events. If this translates to club/hobby shop races/etc as I read it, i don't see this as being a change. The only difference between the local weekly race and a roar sanctioned event would be the effort to fill out the sanctioning forms and handling of all that by those involved local and roar. The people who enforce the rules would not change, nor would their enforcement. How many weekly race events actually tech a car unless there is a clear advantage? Most of the time its just a bunch of guys (and quite a few ladies here now) looking to have fun. They don't care who wins as long as it was a good race. So this would do nothing other than dilute the perceived prestige of a ROAR event because Joe Racer would tend to think that this is how all events are run. I think many people are afraid to say it but I'm not. Its the people who don't actually care about the equality/quality of racing as long as there is racing that is the problem. Its the local mom n pop shops/clubs struggling to get by. We are only a fairweather hobby, in the economical sense and over the last couple of years it has been hard. Its coming back but like everything it cycles. How do you force your members to enforce the rules when many of them are in survival mode?
I haven't been through any sort of issues with needing the roar insurance so I am curious to how the company would deal with non-members if there was a problem? Would they even considering this kind of change?
3) 'forcing' ROAR affiliates.. the idea is a bit controversial.. how do you stop someone from advertising "roar champion"? It's not like they are doing some form of slander/libel. You might be able to get them for Copyright Infringement perhaps - are we going to spend dough on a lawyer to chase these down every year? Would it likely cost more to do that than the increased affiliation it might gain. I do not see this as being positive/productive for everyone, just the industry insiders.
4) National Tracks - You might get away with 2 tracks. One off-road, one on-road and just make them versatile enough to handle all those classes on their respective surfaces. You could then allow a club to use it or not. Somebody will bring up the cost issue if it was going to be a handful of tracks. We all know its going to cost in any case. Near large population areas things aren't cheap. Then again its not cheap if you have to stay at a hotel double digit miles away.
It might be best if we saw this as an opportunity to re-invest in the foundation of our industry by donating funds, or more safely, materials to maintain or update/upgrade Nationals Host tracks. This would be a big incentive for people to bid. Now I'm definitely not talking about turning some guy's backyard into a stadium or anything. What I am referring to is paint, seating, fencing, track borders/lane divider material, landscape clean up, possibly generic audio equipment. Things that would help run the event. A kind of a playground revitalisation. Just make a requirement that potential host tracks have to be in existence and regularly running races for a couple years. (which i thought some other rules have already covered this)
Once again these are some ideas. If nobody agrees with it, that's life. I hope it atleast spurs on some other potentially productive ideas. Good luck candidates and voters.
ROAR Member; Region 4