It was always going to be a long off-season for IndyCar

This was always going to be a long offseason for the Verizon IndyCar Series. With Hulman & Co. CEO Mark Miles' controversial and, in my opinion, ill-advised decision to end the season Labor Day weekend and not resume until early-March, this 2014-2015 offseason was always going to be a challenging one for the series and its diehard fan base, sure to result in a certain degree of frustration and apathy.

And that was before the offseason was extended to nearly seven months with the cancellation of Brasilia, something that appeared to catch the series by surprise; before despised ex-Race Director Brian Barnhart was formally reinstated to his previous position; before whatever else.

Sure, an inexplicable reinstatement of a former disgraced race official, and yet another failed foray overseas (plus the one in Dubai that never materialized either), sadly do not necessarily constitute anything new in the world of Indy Car racing. They do however bring certain questions to the fore, particularly the competence of the series' current management. And competence was not exactly on display in the immediate aftermath of the Brasilia cancellation and Barnhart's reinstatement.

Clueless about being incompetent

Inevitably, when the Brasilia cancellation was announced, speculation began that INDYCAR may try to fill the vacant date with another venue. Now, the fact that there was speculation wasn't a surprise, the fact INDYCAR left the door open so long was. And shortly after the Brasilia news came down, one publication mentioned COTA as a possibility.

[adinserter name="GOOGLE AD"]Now, I don't want to sound as though I am dismissing the reaction of fans, who understandably want to see a race, and preferably sooner rather than later. Many also know that Miles has expressed interest in COTA previously. Further, I think it's a great idea for the series to explore racing at COTA.

Still, anyone possessing very basic knowledge of what is involved in conducting a major motorsports event would have known that haphazardly throwing an event together in five weeks was at best, grossly optimistic, more likely completely delusional. Yet, INDYCAR did nothing to dispute the report, in fact encouraged it to a degree, which actually allowed for a few days of speculation to pass before announcing later that they were going to do what any reasonable person knew: start the season at St. Petersburg.

And what was the net result? Expectations rose, and while not confirmed by INDYCAR, were given some tacit validation by the interim period, only to be dashed again. This after a week in which IndyCar's loyal – albeit small – fan base had to swallow both the Brasilia and Barnhart news, INDYCAR set the stage for expectations to not be fulfilled, again. Sure, one could argue (although I wouldn't) that the Brasilia matter was out of INDYCAR's control. However, the Barnhart matter very much was, similar to the speculation over a replacement for Brasilia.

To a lesser extent this happened with reports surfacing that INDYCAR was considering some kind of accompany event with the Mazda Road to Indy finale in September at Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca. Like that was really going to happen two weeks after the IndyCar Series finale 150 miles away at Sonoma?

But again the series allowed information to leak without putting the kibosh on it. Again, INDYCAR showed itself clueless about being incompetent, as the series allowed expectations to rise, when they would only inevitably have to be deflated-again!

Speaking of erroneous reports

AutoRacing1 ran a translated article on the Rumors page Friday, which claimed the IndyCar Series was on the verge of filing for bankruptcy. Turned out the rumor was not true, as series president of competition and operations Derrick Walker gave AR1 a statement refuting the report in a rather timely manner, to put the kibosh on further speculation.

Fair enough.

And while I'm certain those who don't know any better will criticize AR1 for running the story, it should be noted that it was also AR1 who obtained the statement from Walker. So, if anything AR1 was the one publication that reported fully on the matter.

Now I will add that my experience with such reports, journalistically dubious as they and their translations may be, is they do not surface out of nowhere. Remember, there were numerous reports about issues with Brasilia, which were refuted, one of them exclusively on AR1 by IndyCar Director of Communications Mike Kitchel.

To be clear, I am not accusing nor in any way suggesting Walker or Kitchel to be ingenuous. Kitchel, for example, made his statement nearly three months before the Brasilia cancellation. There was no reason then, nor is there any now to have not taken him at his word. Ditto for Walker.

That said, we are approaching a rather unique milestone in the history of Indy Car racing with the 100th Indianapolis 500 in May of 2016. Further, there have been questions for a few years now surrounding what will happen with the ownership of the series going forward, particularly after the 100th Indianapolis 500 in 2016. These questions have probably been given some life in light of recent events.

Also, keep in mind, the moves Miles has made since taking over in late-2012 have largely been tactical in nature (i.e. shrinking the schedule, improving bottom lines, restructuring May to improve revenues, rebranding and the like). Even the signing of Verizon depending on the level of activation the telecommunications giant employs is while notable, a tactical move.

Of course, Miles' leadership itself is something that is difficult to evaluate considering he is the CEO of Hulman & Co. which owns INDYCAR, IMS, IMS Productions, and Clabber Girl Baking Powder amongst other entities. In other words, Miles' role is fundamentally different than say that of the man we consider his predecessor, Randy Bernard. Bernard was CEO of INDYCAR, and his role was not global per se. What's best for Hulman & Co. may not be what's best for the IndyCar Series or Indy Car racing. Simply put, we don't know.

What we also haven't heard from Miles is a 10 or even 5-year strategic outlook or dare I say, vision. Could that be, because well, there isn't one?

Yes, it's probably unreasonable to think the sky will cave in tomorrow. It is however very reasonable to wonder what the ownership of the IndyCar Series has in mind for say the year 2020. Or perhaps a better question, might be if ownership even has plans that far in advance.

Looking down the road

AutoRacing1, of course, has long questioned the sustainability, formally and informally, of Indy Car racing under the current ownership structure. Perhaps, the most recent notable instance would be January of 2014, when I penned an editorial on behalf of AR1, formally calling for the Hulman-George family, and Miles to do what was best for the sport, it's drivers, teams, fans, those who make a living in Indy Car racing and ultimately their company, and divest of the Verizon IndyCar Series.

To be clear, nothing in particular at the time prompted that article. Also, I don't cite that article as validation of me or AR1, in light of recent events. Simply put, it was the opinion of both myself and those who employ me then, just as it is now, that continued ownership of the series by Hulman & Co. is an untenable situation, something I discuss in further detail in the article.

Yes, we hear talk from 16th and Georgetown about Hulman Motorsports (or whatever name the series has rebranded under) increasing revenues or incremental gains in television viewership. Still, I find it hard to believe the Hulman board would not want to dump whatever debt might be tied to the series. Although, perhaps complicating matters, who would possibly want the series without its crown jewel, IMS?

[adinserter name="GOOGLE AD"]Now, I use to believe the above question to be moot, because I figured the Hulman-George family did not want to return to a pre-CART/IRL situation. I am no longer certain of that.

Other than an assurance that their precious Indy 500 will continue, what does the IndyCar Series bring to the Hulman-George family and Hulman & Co.? Other than having everything in-house how does the series enhance their overall business? And who, if anyone in the Hulman-George family, other than Tony George has ever shown an iota of interest in Indy Car racing as a whole?

I see no clear answers to those questions. But the fact these questions remain after decades of Hulman ownership, might be revealing in and of itself. Further, any reasonable person has to know the series cannot simply continue so detached from the fans it does have. How can one reasonably expect an organization that reveals itself over and over and over again to be hopelessly out-of-touch with the few it does have, to make new ones? How can one expect an organization which obliviously repeats the same mistakes to lead an industry out of the hopeless mess it engineered in the first place?

Yes, whatever the IndyCar Series will be going forward, must be fundamentally different than what it is now. What will that be exactly?

I don't know. But if you seriously take a look five-ten years down the road and imagine what the IndyCar Series will be. It is very hard to imagine it resembling anything close to what it is now.

Take out Poll on our home page – Who should buy and run IndyCar?

Brian Carroccio is a columnist for AutoRacing1. he can be contacted at BrianC@AutoRacing1.com