Here is part #2.
Matt Murray
mailto:mattm@optonline.net
mailto:mdmurray@gwns.com
The event gets shut down for however long that takes. This is
extremely
intrusive, but that's the way good television happens. Communication
between crew and ProSolo2 staffs will have to be highly coordinated,
if
not entirely scripted. That is, to ensure a really good one-shot type
of
show, the whole thing would play from a script. Let me be clear on
this
last
point. If what we're after is to make Pro Solo2 a televised venue,
then
the
production crew, sponsors, drivers, and SCCA have to be in bed
together in a way that most people may not presently contemplate.
Television will
override to a degree that will seriously compromise the power of the
SCCA
to run the
events as they are now presently run. Right now, we're doing it for
the
drivers.
Doing it for TV is a whole different game. I'm not saying that's bad,
just
very
very different. ProSolo2 is not strong enough in the same way that
NASCAR,
CART (or
whatever its called these days...), or even Sprint car racing are
strong
visual
draws. In those venues, the race dictates the pace, and the excitement
does not
have to be "manufactured" with the addition of in-car, telemetry,
on-car,
ant cam,
and other speed/drama inducing devices. The speed, danger, emotion,
tension, and story are big enough to see without these devices. The
fact
that
they've become part and parcel of motor racing teleproductions' bag of
tricks means only that even NASCAR needs -help, but not so much -help
that
these things are mandatory.
In producing a successful show, there is no "beta" version you can
release and fix later. It has to be right the first time. This takes
an
enormous amount of planning, trouble shooting, and can involve scores
of
people, all
of whom are paid professionals. And while you can do a "cheap"
version, no
matter
how well intentioned and clever, it diminishes the sponsor's
probability of
return.
This is not "negative" analysis, it's just analysis.
I could go on with more ideas, because believe me, I've had lots of
time
to think about it being a full time producer and a part time
autocrosser
for the past fifteen years. The things I'd like for people to think
about
are the kinds of things that come with TV that may not be expected.
The up
sides and the down sides. What it does to unite us and what can happen
that divides us. I seriously doubt it would happen, but _If_ Pro Solo2
caught on in a big way, most of us would end up not doing it. The
sport
would be a cadre of about 60 people who went from venue to venue, with
new blood coming in by way of some sort of qualification system which
has
yet to be considered. That's how TV sports works. This is the world
we're
casually talking about. I want this sport to continue to be fun,
personable, and accessible. TV may not change that, but it will
introduce a dynamic that can bring a certain amount of added strain
and
separation
to the sport we all love. Not just administratively, but socially.
I've
seen this
happen in skiing, volleyball, kayaking, and mountain biking (The most
recent amateur
sports to go pro.). In the common sports package, directors look for
stories within
stories. Who are the players? There aren't any?
OK, we'll create them based on who wins the most, who's a continual
brides' maid, who's the underdog, who did Dodge choose to drive for
them,
etc.
Especially the last one. Sponsorship and sponsors get mentioned and
woven into every story. These days, they're paying for it, and it's
expected... After all, they'd own us... we'd just be there to make
them
look good.
(If this sounds cynical, then I'd suggest a quick edification in the
field
of
professional motorsports sponsorship.)
Back on point, what we'd develop is a field of elite semi professional
drivers. I'm not blind to the up side in this. There are many ways
such exposure brings positive side benefits. But lets keep our eyes on
what we
presently have, and how it may change. If you think you can manage or
direct that
change, you've got more money than those who would sponsor
it.
Again, I hope this doesn't come off as negative, although I know some
will read it that way. I love being a TV producer. I love being an
autocrosser. It's my experience that these are just a few of the
things that can happen when these two worlds combine.
Realistically, Pro Solo2 may never create the kind of excitement that
brings it yearly TV sponsorship, and all the things which would flow
from that. But I think it's interesting to think about what kind of
primary
and secondary ramifications a commitment to TV brings. If we want to
do
that, fine. If not, then lets "publicize" the sport in another way via
TV.
What I'd suggest is that we create a made for television event which
is
totally scripted to look as good as possible. Bring in the loud cars,
the interesting cars, the best drivers, an audience on bleachers, and
script it.
This will not be a part of the regular Pro Solo2 Series, but a
separate event made specifically for television. We'll still need a
minimum of $30-k, but the "show" will be a better investment because
we
can control the pace, visual impact, and story. It'll look great, play
a
few times,
and expose the sport to thousands if not millions of people. If
it generates a lot of excitement, sponsorship for bigger packages may
come
more easily. If not, we've lost nothing, (except for those who must
measure their ROI) gained an opening to a TV audience, and a product
that
can serve
as a promotional tape for SCCA Pro Solo2 sponsorship efforts.
In the mean time, be careful what you wish for... you just might get
it.
Rich Fletcher
SCAC member
Group Four Teleproductions, Inc.
|