Brad Keselowski, the 2012 NASCAR Cup Series champion and current team owner, has voiced strong opposition to NASCAR’s increasing reliance on road courses in its schedule. Since the series expanded from two to six road course events, Keselowski has repeatedly expressed concerns about this direction, highlighting the negative effects on business and fan engagement. His criticism underscores growing debate within the sport regarding the popularity and viability of these races.
From a business perspective, Keselowski pointed out the challenges road course events present when seeking sponsorship and fan attendance.
“As a business owner, it’s the hardest races to sell sponsors for. It has the lowest attendance, the lowest ratings,”
he said.
“That doesn’t make sense to me. We should be going places where the sponsors wouldn’t be there, the fans wouldn’t be there, and TV gets the best ratings. And road courses are historically the worst in all of those categories. So, I don’t feel any obligation to that.”
Fan Interest and Ratings Reveal Divided Opinions on Road Courses
The rise in road course races has sparked a split among NASCAR fans and industry insiders alike. While some road course events are praised for exciting finishes, several have not attracted the same level of enthusiasm compared to traditional oval races. Television ratings data emphasize this divide; for example, the 2025 Sonoma Cup race averaged just 2.19 million viewers, trailing behind many midseason oval events.
Additionally, fan reception remains inconsistent. Certain road courses are beloved by sections of the audience, yet others frequently rank as less popular stops on the NASCAR calendar. This has resulted in a fragmented perception among core fans about the place of road courses in the sport’s future.
Attendance Patterns Reflect Reduced Appeal at Some Venues
Road course events also struggle to draw crowds comparable to major oval races. Historical attendance patterns provide insight, with venues such as Indianapolis showcasing this trend. Although tens of thousands may still attend road course races there, these figures fall short of the massive crowds witnessed during the heyday of traditional oval events like the Brickyard 400.
The Brickyard 400, once known for attracting over 200,000 spectators, experienced a significant decline coinciding with the road course conversion. This shift exemplifies the difficulty road course races have in replicating the atmosphere and widespread appeal that such iconic oval events have maintained at venues including Daytona and Talladega.
Sponsor Value Diminished by Lower Ratings and Attendance
Sponsors play an essential role in NASCAR, and their investments hinge on exposure through television ratings and live attendance. Road course races typically generate fewer impressions due to smaller crowds and lower average viewership, which weakens the value proposition for companies backing teams and events. Keselowski emphasized this issue, highlighting the financial implications for team owners and sponsors.
He added further insight into fan preferences regarding race formats:
“Why more people tune into an oval versus a road course. I think a lot of fans identify NASCAR with ovals. And they understand the concept of what we’re doing on ovals and enjoy it more than they do on road courses,”
illustrating the challenge road courses face in winning over traditional NASCAR fans.
Keselowski’s Difficult Performance at Austin Underlines His Frustrations
The recent race at the Circuit of the Americas (COTA) served to intensify Keselowski’s dissatisfaction with road course events. Starting 26th, the RFK Racing driver struggled to make headway in the DuraMAX Grand Prix, hampered by issues with car setup and an early pit stop that cost him significant track position.
Keselowski candidly described his difficulties over the team radio:
“It’s pretty tight at turn-in on every corner, and then from there it’s like I have too much wheel in it and it really shoots the back out hard on me,”
he said.
“I’m just really, really struggling here with no grip.”
Despite a slight recovery to finish 20th, the outing was far from what Keselowski had hoped for as he continues to regain form following a broken leg.
Implications for NASCAR’s Future and Fan Experience
Keselowski’s critique highlights a deeper issue within NASCAR regarding the balance between tradition and innovation on the schedule. His concerns about sponsor engagement, attendances, and broadcast ratings reflect critical factors that will affect the sport’s commercial health and fan loyalty going forward. The evident split among fans over road courses suggests NASCAR will need to carefully consider how to appeal to both traditionalists and those open to new racing formats.
As Keselowski recovers and participates in upcoming races, his perspective carries weight both in the garage and in broader industry conversations. Whether NASCAR adjusts its schedule or continues to increase road course events remains to be seen, but the debate over how to grow the sport while respecting its roots is certain to continue evolving.
