Strategic Planning and "The Problem with IT"

lateapex911

lateapex911

Super Moderator
I thought we'd spin this off as it ws getting pretty big picture.

Synopsis:
Wings...good idea or bad?
  • Bill Denton points out that they do have the advantage of atracting the younger crowd, which is needed.....
  • Kirk comments on the need for any organization to do strategic planning...
  • Travis opines that the SCCA isn't capable, and that NASA will be kicking our butts in a few years...
he said,:
..........as you said, bill's motivation for being in support of wings is very well founded. my perspective is that the solution to the problems in SCCA and IT go far and above just slapping on some trendy parts and stickers, and that doing so would hurt the class without helping the actual issue...........[/b]
Click to expand...

So, I agree that wings aren't a soultion per se'...but to understand what the solution is, you have to know what the problem is...
(One issue that always drives away the more common constiuents is the "Haves and have nots" situation. I feel wings will further seperate the haves and have nots, something I feel IT fights to keep in check and balanced)

So...the qestion...what ARE the problems facing IT? Are they specific to IT only? Or are they part of the greater organization? As an ITAc member, it would interest me to hear where IT fails, and where it should go.

Let's try to keep the suggestions within the realm of possibliity...if you feel that we should be racing cars with stock springs (for example) that's fine, but it would be rather impractical to have the entire country throw away their springs, etc.
 
the only way I think wings will work is if they are all the same...like WC...one supplier and make them optional.
 
the only way I think wings will work is if they are all the same...like WC...one supplier and make them optional.
[/b]
Click to expand...

a list of problems in no particular order

1) too many classes. top 27 rule is a decent start...but it really should go back to if the class doesn't avg 3 cars/race they are eliminated. something like that.
2) regional vs national. further thins the field.
3) Runoffs at Topeka. short of bulldozing the entire track and starting from scratch, nothing can salvage this place. Ozment(s), the BOD, and Julow messed this one up.
4) almost zero tech at anything but the runoffs
5) too many divions/too many races.
6) runoffs structure is assinine for amatuers. 1 week of testing and 1 week of qual/racing is rediculous to ask of normal people
7) the BOD creating classes nobody asked for. Prepared anyone? Ok, maybe pro asked for that one.
8) i'll come up with more later.
 
a list of problems in no particular order

1) too many classes. top 27 rule is a decent start...but it really should go back to if the class doesn't avg 3 cars/race they are eliminated. something like that.
2) regional vs national. further thins the field.
3) Runoffs at Topeka. short of bulldozing the entire track and starting from scratch, nothing can salvage this place. Ozment(s), the BOD, and Julow messed this one up.
4) almost zero tech at anything but the runoffs
5) too many divions/too many races.
6) runoffs structure is assinine for amatuers. 1 week of testing and 1 week of qual/racing is rediculous to ask of normal people
7) the BOD creating classes nobody asked for. Prepared anyone? Ok, maybe pro asked for that one.
8) i'll come up with more later.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Point / Counterpoint

1. NASA now has 14 and still growing. I do agree that 3 min per race is simply not too much to ask.

2. In big regions this works VERY well. We couldn't have an all in one here in the NE. Simply not enough time.

3. Bids were submitted, Topeka was chosen. It hasn't worked well and I bet they learn from their mistake.

4. NASA is no different. Competitors police their own patch. You see something wrong, fix it.

5. Consolodation could certainly happen in some areas. Those regions need to make a business decision.

6. You don't HAVE to go for two weeks. It IS the National Championship after all.

7. Prepared? PERFECT for NASA types. Check out the rules. Motor swaps, wings etc.

IT has no real problems on the grand scale. The problems are in other classes and the lack of participation. The old gaurd hangs on with a white-knuckle grip which really prevents new cars being built. Trying to listen to the legacy customers while creating opportuinty for newbs is tough. NASA doesn't have this problem - YET.
 
Trying to listen to the legacy customers while creating opportuinty for newbs is tough. NASA doesn't have this problem - YET.
[/b]
Click to expand...


focusing on this for a moment, it's situations like these where intelligent BUSINESS decisions need to be made. problem is, we're not run like a business, nor do we have the resources. a business wise person would say the decision needs to be made with an eye towards the future and tendancy towards growth. you can't sell buggy whips forever.
 
Someone should have their eye on the big picture - how the classes all fit together to provide a comprehensive program. It's silly, for example, that the Touring rules aren't simply the IT rules jacked up to new cars. Those cars will have to go SOMEWHERE when they have aged out, after all.

I think it would be AMAZING if there existed another class for ITA-spec cars that were new - too new for the current eligibility rules. There's a huge pool of interesting cars that fit and a semi-pro or "National" series with those cars, built explicitly to IT rules, would be very interesting.

I'm totally with Travis on the small classes should die thing. I've been banging that drum for 20+ years. Problem is, that's a great example of where "member driven" means a small number of holdouts can effectively steer an entire club racing program with their need to keep doing exactly what they have always done - even if there's only six of them.

THIS is Bill's concern, I think.

Ditto the National/Regional distinction. It serves no purpose beyond preserving the status quo for drivers whose sole priority is a RubOffs trip.

The big problems frankly, are not WITH IT - they are AROUND IT. Within the category, we need to attend to the fact that cars are getting faster, and ITR is a great step toward dealing with that reality. The future looks bleak for ITC but there ARE cars that fit. I still think there's value in proactively classing cars that seem like good options in each class, even before someone requests them.

NASA does some things right but they haven't got it all figured out. Their real strength is in in the ability of the HPDE program to grow people into race licenses - something that SCCA has completely missed the boat on.

K
 
Is this a regional issue as much as anything else?

SEDiv, MidAtlantic and NEDiv seem to be extraordinarily healthy right now. We've not seen less than 7 ITS cars at a SARRC race, and as many as 15-20, particularly in Florida.

Bill, is it something about the region (too many races?) that is hurting car counts? Is NASA strong there? I think you have to identify the problem first to work on the cure, and the problem that MidAm has (and it seems real) is not one that we are experiencing here on the right coast.
 
Sorry DAvid, don't mean to be crass, but have to point out -- this from someone who believes you can replace the four links on the RX7 with custom rods and heim rod ends? I agree with you on the latter, but this is starting to look a little meish.

How do you reconcile this? Not picking at you, just interested.


Within IT, opening rules as has been going on lately will only harm IT.......................

If I list the rules than have been opened the list would only start a pi$$ing match......

Close the rules & let the folks who want to open the rules move into the larger pond.

No comments on my thoughts ^ required. :D At this time.



If this is the brain storming portion of the process I would believe people shouldn't start commenting at this time about other peoples thoughts. :D If people are criticized at this point in the process they my read only & not comment.
 
i'm with you for the most part kirk.

i don't know if there should be a class for cars <5yrs old with an identical ruleset to IT or not, but i'm in agreement that it shouldn't be too difficult of a transition. for example, there shouldn't be anything in Touring that is 'beyond' the IT ruleset in terms of prep. So for instance, the RR shocks should be reigned in.

there's a couple different problems with this region Jeff. we are HUGE geographically, but small on a population basis. Good lord, how far is it from Blair NE to Memphis TN? or even Nashville these days apparantly. Hell, it's 10hrs+ from Kansas City to Memphis, and Blair is another 5hrs NW of KC. So what is that, at least 15hrs from the NWernmost track to the SEernmost? The problem is, there's probably more people in NYC than there is this entire division.

combine that with somewhere around 15-17 regional race weekends this season, and you get small car counts across the board. between the June 16th National at HPT, and the end of the Runoffs, 12 of 16 weekends have events if you include the June Sprints and Solo Nationals. That's just plain stupid.

Amplifying the problem is the split between Great Lakes and Central Division. We used to get a decent number of these guys down to STL or Omaha for some events, but now they just go to either GL or Central for their out-of-division races. Splitting the old central division probably hasn't doubled the number of races in the same geographic region, but it's probably close.

We essentially have zero NASA presence in this area, maybe because they know it's a money losing proposition, maybe because it's too close to SCCA HQ, maybe they just haven't got around to it. But they certainly aren't our problem.

The only IT specific big issue is the number of major changes that have been made in a short period of time. I think it's for the greater good, but i can see how it would piss some people off.
 
Well yes of course we should but I would expect the current ITAC would say that do not have the time to do the work.
But I offer a solution. I think this is the job for an ad hoc committee. 5-8 volunteers to include 1 or 2 ITAC members to gather data and make a batch recommendation to the ITAC. The work could most likely be done in a private sub forum as was done with ITR.
 
The whole wing thing to attract the younger tuner age is redicilous in my mind, as far as for IT. If them putting a wing on their car makes the difference of them being a part of IT or not, I think they are the wrong crowd to be searching for because they have a completely different mind set.

As Knestis said NASA gains many new people by them starting in HPDE. They end up just going to a weekend track event and then seeing everything else going on and get hooked on the actual racing scene. NASA has the TT and PT class which makes it easy for someone to take their street car and move into racing without having to do anything special because no matter what car they have and what they have done to it, their is a class for them.
 
Their real strength is in in the ability of the HPDE program to grow people into race licenses - something that SCCA has completely missed the boat on.

K
[/b]
Click to expand...
Yup. SCCA should sponsor tricycle racing. Get them while they are young.
 
As Knestis said NASA gains many new people by them starting in HPDE. They end up just going to a weekend track event and then seeing everything else going on and get hooked on the actual racing scene. NASA has the TT and PT class which makes it easy for someone to take their street car and move into racing without having to do anything special because no matter what car they have and what they have done to it, their is a class for them.
[/b]
Click to expand...

And, more importantly, they can do this without the required safety gear - no cage, no firesuit, etc. It's not wings that keeps the "tuner" crowd away. It's having to put in a real roll cage that keeps them away. They just don't see it as something to make them go faster, so it is not important.
 
You can't wheel-to-wheel race in NASA without meeting safety standards, including a roll cage, kill switch, ectera. Sure you can do this at HPDEs, but lets not forget that SCCA now has the PDX tool. It is a matter of regions actually utilizing this tool effectively. I do really like that NASA incorporates their HPDE into the race weekend. While people might say we just don't have the room to do it at a regional weekend, I feel we need to make the room even if that's just a matter of having one run PDX run group out there of advanced drivers. It is a fantastic way to get people started with a club, then get them involved in W2W racing if that's what they choose. I'm not too familiar with their mentor program, but it is something I think would help people.
 
Are we even on topic? How about 'the problem with IT'? Lets get specific so we can make our own patch better. Leave the 10,000 foot problem 'solving' to the Prod guys... :bash_1_:

Strategic planning for IT.........
 
A friend of mine who runs an Acura Integra in ITA as well as HC and NASA, says that he's slower with the wing on.

Can you say "BLING" ?????
 
Strategic planning for IT.........[/b]
Click to expand...

There's arguably little at the IT categorical level that actually qualifies as "strategic." If that's the highest we can jack issues for discussion, then we have:

** Vision/strategic position for listing new cars

** Position re: how/if new technologies will be integrated into the category

** Position re: alternate drivetrain layouts (e.g., turbos, AWD) and their place in IT

** Consideration of how changing markets might impact IT entrants (e.g., wheel/tire sizes)

** Decisions that might be made to position IT differently relative to other categories/classes and disciplines (Solo)

And...?

K
 
A friend of mine who runs an Acura Integra in ITA as well as HC and NASA, says that he's slower with the wing on.

Can you say "BLING" ?????
[/b]
Click to expand...

It only makes sense...too much drag but it would be fun to play with one LOL. My buddy Chip takes the one off the Koni Challenge RX8 every time we get to a race...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top