On a fateful December day in 1947, Bill France Sr. sat down with a group of men at the Streamline Hotel in Daytona Beach and proved this: All you need to succeed in creating a racing organization is a sheet of paper and a head full of good ideas.

During The Winston weekend in Charlotte, a high-ranking NASCAR official was asked about the possibility of tinkering with the current Winston Cup schedule, to which he replied, ''Could we sit down with a piece of paper and make a better schedule? Sure.''

Well, it worked for Big Bill nearly 55 years ago, didn't it? And since NASCAR's main function -- other than being a successful business, of course -- is to provide the best racing product for its fans, here are some suggested changes for the 2003 Winston Cup schedule.

The hottest track rumor floating around these days is that North Carolina Speedway in Rockingham will lose both its race dates. NASCAR's International Speedway Corporation owns NCS, and apparently the track has fallen out of graces with ISC.

No track that hosts two races should lose both dates, especially if that track showcases some great racing, which NCS does each year. The track is routinely among the fan favorites, but if alterations need to be made, take one race from the Rock but not both.

NASCAR's other two Southern venues under scrutiny, Martinsville and Darlington, should be untouchable and keep both dates. Both tracks have some of the most exciting racing every year, and when racing websites and publications poll fans about their favorite tracks, these two are always in the top five.

More importantly, Martinsville and Darlington are racing artifacts, earthy relics of a bygone era of racing that most of us didn't witness and aren't recorded for us to see. Sure, the cars have changed and the motors produce more horsepower these days, but a race at these two NASCAR pantheons is similar to how it was 50 years ago.

Up north of the Mason-Dixon line, NASCAR could make a few changes to create better racing.

The Big Triangle known as Pocono could stand to lose a race. Supposedly NASCAR had a handshake agreement with the track owner, Dr. Mattioli, that the facility would always have two races. But poor visibility for the fans, no grandstands except on the airport-like frontstretch, terrible traffic patterns, and the track's remote location are just a few of the reasons Pocono should lose a date.

New Hampshire International Speedway was enjoyable up until 1997 when it was awarded a second date, and it should lose a race. NASCAR has already removed Watkins Glen from the Busch schedule, and you can't help but feel the archaic road course facility is on NASCAR's chopping block as well, so take that race as well.

Michigan has dull races that more often than not are won on fuel efficiency, but it will continue to host two races each year as long as they build cars in nearby Detroit. No track offers more manufacturer braggings rights than MIS, so don't expect those dates to move.

That leaves four openings on the schedule. Does NASCAR finally award a second date to Texas? Would it dare give a third date to Bristol, the most popular track on the schedule? What about sparkling new venues in Nashville and Kentucky, site of Saturday's Busch race?

I've done the ugly part -- the subtractions -- of schedule-making, so I'll let NASCAR dole out the happiness of adding a race date to a track.

I'll even supply the paper.

Bill Whitehead writes for The Stuart News in Florida.