Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

AJ/Dixon Article

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • AJ/Dixon Article

    So on a Facebook Indycar fan page, I stirred up a lot of comments with my post on the article attached.

    Now Scott... go form your own team, design your own cars, do your own finances / secure sponsors, be your own engineer, tool on your own car during the race, and I’ll put you in the category of AJ Foyt. Lot different than just showing up and driving for a top team.

    Maybe the media could do a little educational segment on AJ vs just telling us that Indycar travel the length of a football field every second.
    Perhaps people think I am hating on Dixon, and it is not the case. Certainly no driver today does what AJ did and that is what made him so special. So excuse me if I just don't jump on the Dixon bandwagon. Mears, Unser, Mario, and others all just showed up and drove. AJ did it all, and I bet most don't even know that. You certainly couldn't learn that because AJ is not even discussed. Mario gets his accolades every week driving the two-seater. Sure wish they would highlight this man while he is still around. He is a national treasure.
    Dixon's strong weekend keeps him marching toward Foyt's all-time championship mark.

  • #2
    A very good point. It is what makes AJ special. Lest I ruffle any feathers: All this "extra" separates AJ from the drivers that "only" have to concentrate on driving. Also I think Dixon is so good I'd take him over Hamilton. IMHO.
    Get off my lawn!

    Comment


    • #3
      Fair point, however AJ was also racing at a time when you could dominate a lot easier. It could be argued that AJ had it easy as he had poorer competition.

      These comparisons are hard.

      Comment


      • #4
        The world has changed greatly from the days of Foyt in his heyday. There's no way one individual could own, engineer, wrench, drive, promote and other ownership requirements in today's elite racing environment. However, Foyt wasn't racing against a field of drivers in which the slowest driver is only 3.5 seconds slower than the fastest driver in the field. Nor did Foyt have to deal with a rules limiting rule book that make the cars "cookie cutter" generally speaking. Dixon has gone from CART cars and through every era of IRL/current Indycar car design/rules package and excelled regardless of the limitations.

        Lastly, all the things listed as "great" accomplishments of AJ's career can also be addressed as limitations as well. Throughout the CART era Foyt cars were notoriously under engineered and were the last cars in CART paddocks to receive updates as compared to their competitors.

        Comment


        • #5
          Just as you can’t compare Tom Brady to Johnny Unitas (and you can’t compare Unitas to Sammy Baugh), you can’t compare Dixon to Foyt other than by statistics and statistics don’t tell the whole story.
          Let’s just say they’re both damn good drivers who were tops in Indycar their era.
          Anything else is a pissing contest.
          In my opinion.
          Maybe.
          “With the help of God and true friends, I come to realize
          I still got two strong legs, even wings to fly
          I ain’t wastin’ time no more...”

          Comment


          • #6
            After Dixon wins the Daytona 500 and Le Mans he can submit his resume for consideration....
            Road racing is doomed...what this country needs is a big new racetrack designed for automobiles instead of horses. C.G. Fisher

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Chaparral4 View Post
              The world has changed greatly from the days of Foyt in his heyday. ...................................... Dixon has gone from CART cars and through every era of IRL/current Indycar car design/rules package and excelled regardless of the limitations.
              ..................
              Eras can't be compared. As you say things are so incredibly different.

              In Dixon's era it was (and is) the engineering on the cars that helped to give a driver an advantage. That is especially true in the spec racing era where Dixon has nearly always had an engineering advantage by being on a top team with the best resources to take advantage of the rules. I'm not taking anything away from Dixon because he is certainly the greatest of his time.

              But Dixon has also raced in an era where, short of something freak happening, the odds of getting hurt in an Indy car were next to zero. Drivers expect to walk away from crashes.

              In the era when Foyt really excelled any crash at all could be, and often was, fatal. In Foyt's third season seven drivers died driving Indy cars. No one said anything about it and as soon as the crashed cars were repaired there were new drivers standing in line to take over the seat from the driver that was killed. Dixon has never had to race in that kind of a situation.

              Again, I'm still saying that Dixon is the best of his era. But with the passing of Bobby Unser it struck me how many news outlets commented on his career even though he hasn't raced in forty years. I'm not sure what it means but something is different today when drivers from the past (Foyt, Andretti, Mears, the Unsers) are still better known than are great drivers like Dixon.

              Non race fans have heard of Andretti and Foyt. Most of them likely know nothing of today's winningest IndyCar driver Scott Dixon. I honestly have no idea why this is apparently the case.

              Like I said you simply can't compare drivers from such different eras to each other.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by indyrjc View Post

                Eras can't be compared. As you say things are so incredibly different.

                In Dixon's era it was (and is) the engineering on the cars that helped to give a driver an advantage. That is especially true in the spec racing era where Dixon has nearly always had an engineering advantage by being on a top team with the best resources to take advantage of the rules. I'm not taking anything away from Dixon because he is certainly the greatest of his time.

                But Dixon has also raced in an era where, short of something freak happening, the odds of getting hurt in an Indy car were next to zero. Drivers expect to walk away from crashes.

                In the era when Foyt really excelled any crash at all could be, and often was, fatal. In Foyt's third season seven drivers died driving Indy cars. No one said anything about it and as soon as the crashed cars were repaired there were new drivers standing in line to take over the seat from the driver that was killed. Dixon has never had to race in that kind of a situation.

                Again, I'm still saying that Dixon is the best of his era. But with the passing of Bobby Unser it struck me how many news outlets commented on his career even though he hasn't raced in forty years. I'm not sure what it means but something is different today when drivers from the past (Foyt, Andretti, Mears, the Unsers) are still better known than are great drivers like Dixon.

                Non race fans have heard of Andretti and Foyt. Most of them likely know nothing of today's winningest IndyCar driver Scott Dixon. I honestly have no idea why this is apparently the case.

                Like I said you simply can't compare drivers from such different eras to each other.
                Makes one wonder how many of the current drivers would of raced back in the day ?????

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by nascarnation View Post
                  After Dixon wins the Daytona 500 and Le Mans he can submit his resume for consideration....
                  Yep, and Dixon doesn’t even own a winery - yet.

                  Both are fine drivers and good guys. Top class.
                  Where’s a picture of Dixon pacing the field at Milwaukee in his dirt car?

                  https://www.autoweek.com/racing/indy...ole-milwaukee/

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by indyrjc View Post

                    Eras can't be compared. As you say things are so incredibly different.

                    In Dixon's era it was (and is) the engineering on the cars that helped to give a driver an advantage. That is especially true in the spec racing era where Dixon has nearly always had an engineering advantage by being on a top team with the best resources to take advantage of the rules. I'm not taking anything away from Dixon because he is certainly the greatest of his time.

                    But Dixon has also raced in an era where, short of something freak happening, the odds of getting hurt in an Indy car were next to zero. Drivers expect to walk away from crashes.

                    In the era when Foyt really excelled any crash at all could be, and often was, fatal. In Foyt's third season seven drivers died driving Indy cars. No one said anything about it and as soon as the crashed cars were repaired there were new drivers standing in line to take over the seat from the driver that was killed. Dixon has never had to race in that kind of a situation.

                    Again, I'm still saying that Dixon is the best of his era. But with the passing of Bobby Unser it struck me how many news outlets commented on his career even though he hasn't raced in forty years. I'm not sure what it means but something is different today when drivers from the past (Foyt, Andretti, Mears, the Unsers) are still better known than are great drivers like Dixon.

                    Non race fans have heard of Andretti and Foyt. Most of them likely know nothing of today's winningest IndyCar driver Scott Dixon. I honestly have no idea why this is apparently the case.

                    Like I said you simply can't compare drivers from such different eras to each other.
                    It's simple. We live in an instant gratification society and the TV rewards that behavior with the NBA, MLB and NFL and all their permutations with fantasy leagues and such. Indycar racing is well down the list and has never had similar promotion to the masses. Simply put, kids by and large simply don't care and are not inclined to sit through a three hour event like the Indy 500 with out some other form of unrelated entertainment in the palm of their hand.

                    Comment

                    Unconfigured Ad Widget

                    Collapse
                    Working...
                    X