"If, if, if" is usually the theme when it comes to the NASCAR Cup Series playoffs, and that was no different this year than it has been in past years.
Even though 2025 champion Kyle Larson led the series in total points scored throughout the season, frustrations with the format were arguably even stronger than they were a year ago, when Joey Logano somehow parlayed a five-overtime win over the driver sitting last in points and a 15th place regular season points finish into his third championship.
The go-to for a lot of fans is those allegedly "all-important" full-season points standings. Even though we all know the approach from every single driver and team would be different in some way, shape, or form if there were no playoffs, these standings supposedly "prove" who the "real" champion is.
The problem is that those standings aren't even based on race results.
Ever since the advent of stage racing in 2017, points have been awarded during each stage depending on where drivers are running at predetermined laps.
For all non-Coca-Cola 600 races, there are two stages before the race-ending stage, and points are awarded to the top 10 drivers in each. This means that in the average race, the race winner can end up being as low as 11th in total points scored, while the 16th place finisher can lead all drivers in points for the same race.
So yes, you can technically win a "full-season points championship" because you were running ninth instead of 10th, one-third of the way through some random race in late February. That makes a lot of sense.
One thing to note is that stage racing was effectively added as a playoff enhancement, with stage winners earning one playoff point to carry through to each round of the playoffs to which they advance. In other words, stage racing never existed when playoffs didn't exist.
Additionally, for the "performed best when the lights shined brightest" crowd, does running in the top 10 in the middle of a mid-summer race really constitute such an achievement?
Of course, eliminating stage racing would also change how drivers and teams would go about strategizing for each race, or at the very least, for most races. But if we do what the non-playoff crowd does and simply add up each driver's point total based on nothing more than race results, the outcome is somewhat surprising.
This year's champion, based on nothing more than points scored from race results, would have been Joe Gibbs Racing's Christopher Bell, and the runner-up would have been Hendrick Motorsports' Chase Elliott.
Neither one of the two actually qualified for the Championship 4.
And the top finishing Championship 4 driver actually would have been Joe Gibbs Racing's Chase Briscoe, which is ironic because he was largely viewed as having had the weakest season among the four Championship 4 drivers.
Interestingly enough, Bell led all drivers in points scored during the first nine races of the playoffs, yet he still didn't advance to the winner-take-all championship round.
Instead, in a format that supposedly places winning above all else, Larson was crowned champion despite having not won a race since May, even though each of the other three title contenders each won in October, and despite recording the lowest Championship 4 finish for a champion in the 12-year Championship 4 era; he didn't even lead a lap.
Even Bell and Elliott both won in September, while Larson was rarely a factor during any part of the second half of the season. He was still the one holding the big trophy at Phoenix Raceway on Sunday.
At the end of the day, none of the hypothetical scenarios matter, and as much as that drives fans crazy, the good thing is that change is likely on the way. The concerning part of that, though, is that the changes could only make things worse, if NASCAR focuses on altering the wrong elements of the season.
Given their history when it comes to the championship format, I'm afraid to say we probably can't count that out.