NASCAR mailbag: Is the low downforce aero package a cure-all for better racing?

Each Wednesday SB Nation’s NASCAR reporter Jordan Bianchi answers your questions about the latest news and happenings within the sport. If you have a mailbag question email jordanmbianchi@gmail.com.

There is a lot of talk about going to a low downforce aero package and how it’s better, but watching Sunday’s race I can’t really tell much of a difference. It seems to me the issue with NASCAR isn’t so much the cars but the tracks. There are just too many tracks not suited to stock cars. Look at Texas where Indy cars put on a terrific show on Saturday and compare that to a Cup race there. One puts you on the edge of your seat, the other puts you to sleep.

--Pat

It’s the very conundrum NASCAR faces because no matter how great an aero package it devises, the quality of its product still faces limitations based on what track it’s competing at on a given week. Sometimes that will be a good thing, other times not.

What’s transpired this season is a perfect example. The low downforce package currently being used is a significant improvement, largely generating good competition. However, there have been some noticeable duds. Not surprisingly, coming at tracks (Texas, Kansas, and Indianapolis) where the sport traditionally has struggled to develop a rules configuration lending itself to entertaining racing.

Michigan falls in between. Sunday’s race may have been a considerable improvement from previous versions, yet still featured prolonged periods where cars would get strung-out and passing scarce. The blame doesn’t lay with the low downforce package, that’s simply a byproduct of intermediate speedway tracks, which unfortunately clutter the Sprint Cup schedule.

Beyond completely reforming the calendar, which isn’t happening, a possible solution is what was discussed in this space a week ago: Using a chemical compound like at Bristol to doctor the surface therefore improve the racing. Perhaps it won’t work to the same effect, but it’s worth experimenting.

How conflicted must Chip Ganassi be to see one of his drivers get into the Chase but maybe at the expense of his other driver?

--James

Being conflicted is better than the alternative: Kyle Larson doesn’t win, therefore isn’t playoff eligible, while Jamie McMurray still remains squarely on the Chase bubble. At least now Ganassi stands a chance of getting both in, whereas before it was just one.

At least in this tradeoff, Ganassi gets the one driver capable of making a deep playoff run. Sure, McMurray could use consistency to advance a round, maybe two if everything goes right. But Larson’s ceiling is much higher due to his ability to run up front -- he’s led 181 laps this season, McMurray’s led zero -- which can translate into a win. And if you can score a Chase victory or two, you have an opportunity to get far.

As for the juxtaposition owners face when they field multiple cars, it’s unavoidable. Just look how often Hendrick and Joe Gibbs Racing have had to experience a similar situation whether it’s Jimmie Johnson beating Gordon for the championship in 2007, or Carl Edwards bumping Kyle Busch out of the lead on the final lap earlier this season at Richmond. It happens, you move on as best as you can and hope any hard feelings don’t linger.

With Larson finally winning for the first time, which driver is next to do it? It has to be Chase Elliott, right?

--Brian

If you were doing a draft of which driver will be next to make their first trip to victory lane, Chase Elliott is the clear-cut, surefire No. 1 pick. He has the talent and the team, and finds himself in the same spot Larson was in prior to Sunday, where it’s expected he’ll win soon and if he doesn’t questions will arise of why he hasn’t already.

Outside of Elliott, Austin Dillon and Ryan Blaney also deserve consideration. Dillon has done a good job of blending his trademark aggressiveness with a steady approach where he tends to get the best result possible every week. What’s hindering him is the lack of speed in the Richard Childress Racing cars overall, especially on intermediate tracks.

Not having speed hasn’t been an issue for Blaney, who has often run inside the top 10. His biggest hurdle is making it to the finish without incident, as he’s shown a tendency to overdrive resulting in quite a few damaged cars. With some more patience he’ll smooth out and become a fixture near the front like his rookie counterpart.

If Dale Earnhardt Jr. is out for the rest of the season, should Hendrick Motorsports just settle on one replacement instead of a rotation? And if Jeff Gordon isn’t open to it, what about giving Alex Bowman more shots?

--Ron

If Gordon is available and willing, there is no rotation; Hendrick will have him substitute until Earnhardt is medically cleared to return. That makes sense on a multitude of levels, as Gordon still possesses the ability to produce the desired results and provides a veteran’s know how to help an organization overcome its shortcomings as of late.

But if Gordon is unable due to other commitments, such as what occurred this past weekend, or wants to continue enjoying retired life as he indicated to reporters at Bristol -- “I was enjoying my summer a lot,” he said. “To go from my experience [vacationing] in France and how relaxing that was to the intensity level at Indy, it was a big wake-up call for me” -- then Hendrick needs to reassess and determine whether the No. 88 is better served with the same driver week-to-week.

Under this scenario, Bowman is the obvious candidate to become Earnhardt’s permanent fill-in. The 23-year-old isn’t lacking Cup experience with two full seasons under his belt, and has impressed in both relief starts for Earnhardt. He was running in the top 10 at New Hampshire before cutting a tire, and qualified a career-best sixth last weekend at Michigan and would’ve likely contended for a solid finish were it not for a mechanical failure.

Of course, this discussion becomes moot if Earnhardt announces next week he’s healthy and able to race at Richmond.