So the C.O.T. makes it's maiden voyage this weekend and let the debates begin. But here are few things I'm guessing some naysayers will be talking about most likely before the checkered flag fall Sunday afternoon.
* "The C.O.T didn't gave us any better side by side race."
Racing ANY car that has the weight of a CUP car will not offer much in the way of a side by side racing at a track configuration like Bristol. Since going to a concrete surface in 1992, 'racing' has become more of a 'race' to get to the bottom of the track, and the common way to pass is by heavily over using the chrome horn. This will not change with the C.O.T.
* "The C.O.T. will not save the teams any money."
I guess this depends on how one looks at a comment like this. Ray Evernham has been quoted as saying "it won't save his team any money, but it will help keep future cost down". Now correct if I am wrong, but isn't anything that keeps future cost from rising, actually saving money? The glass is still half full.
*"The C.O.T.'s front air damn splitter is too fragile."
This type of front splitter has been used in the CTS for years now, and that series has had little problems with it. Plus the added dimension of 'adjustability' can only be a positive attribute for the teams.
* "After some recent crashes, the cars are safe enough right now."
That statement is about as far from the truth as it can be. Just because some of the recent crashes have been documented as some of the 'hardest hits' ever registered, doesn't mean that safety should take a back seat.
I understand the reasons why Nascar chose Bristol as one of the first tracks to use the C.O.T. , as it is a track where aero issues really don't come into play as much as most other tracks. However, that being said, the expectations from many (or hoping for this to fail) might be more of a product of the track more than anything. Bristol is Bristol, and that fact is not going to change under the current track configuration. We can still look forward to a plethora of laps under caution, and 20 or so 'little ones' instead of one 'big one'.