Silly Season 2016/2017

[dren]

Nico is a top driver. He'd have won the championship last year easily if it wasn't for Hamilton having an edge. Nico would give anyone a run for their money in qualifying. I just don't see anyone paying him more than Mercedes are willing to offer. An open Mercedes seat would be the most attractive. If Nico leaves, they won't have a problem filling it.

[Phil]

What if Ferrari was willing to pay more? Lets face it; Ferrari needs change. They've restructured, they got Vettel, the PU is better... and yet, again, it looks like they are falling behind expectations. Their own expectations. Coming into 2016 and many thought they would be challenging for wins. Instead, it's been RedBull who has been looking stronger and stronger. Then there is the curious case of Kimi Raikkonen. IMO - they're in no better position (driver wise) than before, before they replaced the driver whom they wanted more consistency of (Massa). It's the same story over again. And lets face it; They kept Massa far too long than what made sense. Back then, it was Alonso who was keen on keeping the number 2 driver, now, it's Vettel that has no problem with Kimi.

I say, something needs to change, and if 2016 turns out the same as 2015 did, I believe Kimi will get the axe. So why would they go for Rosberg? I think Rosberg might be attractive to Ferrari because he is proven to be quick (against Hamilton) and he might have some insight in regards to what makes that Mercedes such a special car. And it's not all in the PU, there are obviously other things that make the Mercedes the strong package it is, things that Rosberg would quite obviously be aware of. Also, having a stronger team-mate might also push Vettel. Not that he needs it, but it's always hard to judge the strength of a driver if the other isn't performing at his best. Same applies to Hamilton when he was partnered up with Kovalainen.

If Rosberg happens to be quicker than Vettel, then that will only hurt Vettel, not Ferrari. If Vettel is quicker, they might find Rosberg to be a more consistent 2nd driver. If they are both equal, even better. They'll push each other. But the best bit is what Rosberg might bring in form of knowledge. And who wouldn't want to finish out their career at Ferrari? I think the negotiations between Nico and Mercedes is tricky - they know what he might take with him if he leaves, but at the same time they might not want to pay him too much to stay. And keeping Rosberg would ensure a bit of stability going into a bit of an unknown with new rules.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

He beat Michael Schumacher for 3 seasons on points, and most people put it down to Schumacher being past his best. He takes the fight to Lewis in 2014 up till the last race, beats him in qualifying (even if we know that qualifying had too many technical issues) and 2015 onto 2016, he secures 7 straight victories against the 3 times WDC, is leading 2016 by a still significant margin and still he is severely underrated.

Statistics are not the greatest representation, if we are talking about qualitative analysis of driver. Michael was clearly getting better and better in 2012 and was definitely better of the two in the second half of 2012. So, using just the numbers will hide the true picture there.

Without going too much in detail about 2014 and 2015, as everyone knows and the discussion has been done umpteen number of times, I just pose one question. If the nearest competitor of Mercedes, would have been just two or three tenths slower, instead of 8 tenths, what would have been Nico's record in qualifying? Because most of the times when Lewis beat Nico in qualifying, it was with faily big margin. No genuine threat from any other team, just created this illusion that Nico is somehow a great qualifier. In reality, he always did what a decent driver would have done and on many occasions when Lewis committed mistakes, got pole. Post Singapore, 2015 is still a mystery to me. How is that suddenly, a guy who was dominating, lost speed to the extent of half a second?

Do we forget, it was because of the double points farce that Nico was still in contention until last race, otherwise the championship was over two races prior? A Straight forward 2015 proved, he can't genuinely challenge for the title.

Nico is a top driver. He'd have won the championship last year easily if it wasn't for Hamilton having an edge. Nico would give anyone a run for their money in qualifying. I just don't see anyone paying him more than Mercedes are willing to offer. An open Mercedes seat would be the most attractive. If Nico leaves, they won't have a problem filling it.

It was the same with Webber. If not for VETTEL HAVING AN EDGE, Webber would have won many a championships. It was the same with Barrichello....................

He has been always underrated and its quite unfair. He lacks the charm of Alonso or Hamilton and perhaps their magic touch but he can be as fast as both drivers.

Because there isn't a single performance of him, which was breath taking and instead, has too many messy performances to prove otherwise. Someone who has no clue how to hold the steering wheel in wet.

[Phil]

Do we forget, it was because of the double points farce that Nico was still in contention until last race, otherwise the championship was over two races prior? A Straight forward 2015 proved, he can't genuinely challenge for the title.

This is blatantly false. The point difference going into the last race was 17 points between the two. I'll let you do the math.

I'm not saying that Nico is better than Hamilton - I was saying he is underrated.

It is remarkable that Rosberg beat Schumacher on points and come so close in at least 2014 to winning the WDC. Even in the more one-sided 2015 season, he managed to stay in contention until the 4th last race of that season. But the most impressive point, is that he actually managed to beat Hamilton on numerous occasions in qualifying and the race. Not many drivers I can think of who managed that feat. Alonso is one of them - way back in 2007. Button, not so much. Yes, he beat Hamilton on points in that notorious 2011 season, but I can't think of one instance where Button passed Hamilton on track and in qualifying, it was usually a much more one-sided affair. Rosberg is a lot closer and rating Hamilton as one of the best, I think that in itself is remarkable.

Now, I am not going to argue statistics - in fact, I know full well that it doesn't take into consideration what happened during races, who had what technical problems or circumstance to deal with, but Rosberg is not that far off. I may agree that in the best car on the grid, the gap between amazing and great or good is smaller [than usual], just as i.e. unpredictable weather conditions widen the gap, but it still is what it is.

[Jolle]

Do we forget, it was because of the double points farce that Nico was still in contention until last race, otherwise the championship was over two races prior? A Straight forward 2015 proved, he can't genuinely challenge for the title.

This is blatantly false. The point difference going into the last race was 17 points between the two. I'll let you do the math.

I'm not saying that Nico is better than Hamilton - I was saying he is underrated.

It is remarkable that Rosberg beat Schumacher on points and come so close in at least 2014 to winning the WDC. Even in the more one-sided 2015 season, he managed to stay in contention until the 4th last race of that season. But the most impressive point, is that he actually managed to beat Hamilton on numerous occasions in qualifying and the race. Not many drivers I can think of who managed that feat. Alonso is one of them - way back in 2007. Button, not so much. Yes, he beat Hamilton on points in that notorious 2011 season, but I can't think of one instance where Button passed Hamilton on track and in qualifying, it was usually a much more one-sided affair. Rosberg is a lot closer and rating Hamilton as one of the best, I think that in itself is remarkable.

Now, I am not going to argue statistics - in fact, I know full well that it doesn't take into consideration what happened during races, who had what technical problems or circumstance to deal with, but Rosberg is not that far off. I may agree that in the best car on the grid, the gap between amazing and great or good is smaller [than usual], just as i.e. unpredictable weather conditions widen the gap, but it still is what it is.

Nico is one of the top drivers on the grid, no question about it. The difference between the top 5 are way smaller then the differences between the cars. But Nico's biggest problem that he is boring. Not as a driver (well, partly), but most of all as a person.
Like I said, this has nothing to do with his speed or ability to race, but it's less marketable, so, he won't get the same contract als Hamilton or Alonso.

If Williams was the Williams of the days of Hill and Villeneuve, Rosberg would have been the best driver for them ever. Unfortunately, the brands want mega stars

[Manoah2u]

It is remarkable that Rosberg beat Schumacher on points

Remarkably bad if you concider the facts that came out after Schumacher had his tragic skiing incident that when he had his motorcycling accident, it was worse than initially suggested ('just a broken neck, which wasnt nothing to be honest'), as he also had suffered artery damage which caused minor but permanent damage to his motoric functions. He thus 'rebooted' his F1 career with a handicap compared to before. It makes you look to the 'this is not the same Schumacher that drove for Ferrari' comment from Luca di Montezemolo in a whole new setting, because that bloke knew all about that.
In other words, Rosberg just managed to keep up with a 'old', physically damaged F1 driver whom had been out of the game for several years and entered a F1 design formula quite different to his era in a car that had not yet been adjusted to his likes.

It does not make Rosberg anymore special, it rather makes Schumacher more special that dispite a handicap he was still able to 'come along' with the field, unfortunately he just did not have it in him to be where he was before.

So in reality, the Schumacher-Rosberg comparison doesn't fly. As this Schumacher simply was not the same legend of a man that he was just a decade before. Rosberg is not even a toenail compared to Schumacher in his glory days.

Rosberg 'couldn't adjust' to his braking balance issues and couldn't even slot a GP-winning capable car into 2nd slot, but way back. Rosberg is not underrated, Rosberg is grossly overrated. He's in a car that does all the work for him, and the only reason he WAS pretty good up front in the standings was because all of the technical problems Lewis endured for the first few races of the season. The point difference has nearly vanished in just 1 race ( 1 !!! ), to a minor 24 points difference.

1 DNF for rosberg and Lewis on P1 and he's on the back foot again like he has been always.

[GPR-A duplicate2]

What if Ferrari was willing to pay more? Lets face it; Ferrari needs change. They've restructured, they got Vettel, the PU is better... and yet, again, it looks like they are falling behind expectations. Their own expectations. Coming into 2016 and many thought they would be challenging for wins. Instead, it's been RedBull who has been looking stronger and stronger. Then there is the curious case of Kimi Raikkonen. IMO - they're in no better position (driver wise) than before, before they replaced the driver whom they wanted more consistency of (Massa). It's the same story over again. And lets face it; They kept Massa far too long than what made sense. Back then, it was Alonso who was keen on keeping the number 2 driver, now, it's Vettel that has no problem with Kimi.

I say, something needs to change, and if 2016 turns out the same as 2015 did, I believe Kimi will get the axe. So why would they go for Rosberg? I think Rosberg might be attractive to Ferrari because he is proven to be quick (against Hamilton) and he might have some insight in regards to what makes that Mercedes such a special car. And it's not all in the PU, there are obviously other things that make the Mercedes the strong package it is, things that Rosberg would quite obviously be aware of. Also, having a stronger team-mate might also push Vettel. Not that he needs it, but it's always hard to judge the strength of a driver if the other isn't performing at his best. Same applies to Hamilton when he was partnered up with Kovalainen.

If Rosberg happens to be quicker than Vettel, then that will only hurt Vettel, not Ferrari. If Vettel is quicker, they might find Rosberg to be a more consistent 2nd driver. If they are both equal, even better. They'll push each other. But the best bit is what Rosberg might bring in form of knowledge. And who wouldn't want to finish out their career at Ferrari? I think the negotiations between Nico and Mercedes is tricky - they know what he might take with him if he leaves, but at the same time they might not want to pay him too much to stay. And keeping Rosberg would ensure a bit of stability going into a bit of an unknown with new rules.

Would Nico accept being de facto number 2? Vettel seems to have in his contract that he would be treated No. 1. Here are Lewis' words, while his contract negotiation was ongoing.

“I’ve never, ever, ever asked for a number one clause,” Hamilton told Sky Sports News HQ. “Sebastian will have that. Fernando always asks for that. I have never, ever asked for that.

[NL_Fer]

I think Mercedes is scared --- about 2017 Redbull. Without a dedicated nr1 and nr2 the next season could become very hard.

[Phil]

Remarkably bad if you concider the facts that came out after Schumacher had his tragic skiing incident that when he had his motorcycling accident, it was worse than initially suggested ('just a broken neck, which wasnt nothing to be honest'), as he also had suffered artery damage which caused minor but permanent damage to his motoric functions. He thus 'rebooted' his F1 career with a handicap compared to before.

No doubt Schumacher wasn't the driver he was. Instead of attributing this to a neck injury however, I would point towards other multiple factors - he used to suffer quite a bit of bad luck and most of all, I've always been of the opinion that this new era of F1 didn't suit the former world champion. A lot of that had to do with the Pirelli tires, the ban on refueling and the way these new cars drive. Schumacher used to race under a completely different formula. And the tires and how the car drives is a huge factor; Just look at Webber competing for the championship in 2010, then to not stand a chance in 2011, but then be closer again in 2012? This is also part of the reason why we for instance saw Schumacher get better and better, even against Rosberg too, as he got to grips with this new form of racing. His race craft was undisputed too, similar to Hamilton, which we saw on a few occasion when Rosberg closed the gap from behind but was unable to get past and Schumacher showed us superb defensive driving.

Even so, you don't compete on this level if you are that (= as handicapped as you make it to be) handicapped. Michael Schumacher was an extraordinary driver, but in this era, it's not in the drivers ability to fulfill miracles (unless perhaps in very unpredictable circumstances). One can only do what the car is able to. Stick Senna into one of these new cars, in that Mercedes if you like, and he too would struggle against the current best. Back in the older era of F1, the driver used to be a much larger factor because you were on the verge of driving into your death. It was a matter of confidence and outright willingness to go beyond what other drivers were willing to. This created the large differences in performance between drivers. Fast forward to today and the sport has become safer, the cars easier to drive at the very limit and thus, the difference between good and extraordinary drivers has narrowed significantly.

So why do I still think Rosbergs beating Schumacher to be remarkable? Because he beat Schumacher in qualifying more often than not and back then, popular belief was that Schumacher was just 'past his best'. Then 2013 came and we suddenly saw how Rosberg performed against a driver [Hamilton] who is known to be a strong qualifier. In 2014, yes, Hamilton suffered multiple technical issues in qualifying, yet we also saw Hamilton make mistakes under pressure. This same Rosberg guy falls perhaps just a little short of Hamilton, but he surely isn't that far off either. He can't be, or else he wouldn't be as competitive as he is. And I am predominantly speaking of qualifying here. And that performance puts what he achieved against Schumacher into better perspective. It for one makes it more impressive what Schumacher achieved despite the handicaps, his age, the tires, the huge difference in how these cars drive in this new era of Formula 1, but at the same time, it also puts into perspective how well Rosberg himself has performed since at Mercedes.

Yet your post proves exactly the point I was making; that Rosberg is indeed grossly underrated by many. Underrated doesn't mean he is better than Hamilton - in my opinion, he is close. Damn close. Even in the one sided 2015 where Hamilton won the qualifying battle fair and square, there at times wasn't that much that separated both of them. At times it was that close, it could have been a coin toss. And the guy who puts it on pole is at an advantage: He starts on the clean side and is further ahead. Equal starts and the car on pole will usually remain ahead. And then there is also the point that the leading car receives the preferred strategy by the team. Another advantage. Winning qualifying is at least half of the battle. When Rosberg started putting that car on pole last year (Mexico, Brazil, AbD), we saw a frustrated Hamilton behind, limited by track position and by strategy to get past. If Rosberg beats Hamilton this year in qualifying more often than not, Hamilton will have a tough time in the race. And every win for either driver means at least a 7 point gap increase.

Would Nico accept being de facto number 2? Vettel seems have in his contract that he would be treated No. 1.

I personally think Ferrari are past that. There might be 'de facto number 1 and 2' when it serves the teams best interest, but I doubt there is a clause in the contract that states Vettel is the 'de facto number 1 driver' or something along those lines. To do that would be stupid on Ferrari's behalf - it would limit their ability to gain the best possible advantage as a team. There might be clauses however that state that the team is happy to enforce team-orders when deemed necessary...

Anyway, I think Ferrari have realized that to compete, they not only need the best driver(s), but they also need know-how. Given that Mercedes is (still) that dominant, I believe Rosberg would be an attractive proposition. If Manoah2u is correct in his belief that Rosberg is that ordinary, worst case for Ferrari is that he is simply a good replacement for Kimi Raikkonen. If he is better, they will have two drivers to push each other. If Rosberg proves to be better than Vettel (hey, we'll never know until they race in the same team, in identical cars), then that will only limit Vettels image, his status, perhaps his salary. And more importantly, it would give Ferrari as a team perspective to know who is extracting more from the given package.

IMO history has shown it is not good for a team to place all its eggs in one basket. Ferrari seemed to have done that with Alonso and I think it's would be again a mistake if they continue that with Vettel. To know how well one is performing and how much one is extracting out of your car, you need two good drivers to measure each against one another. If you have two drivers with a larger difference in performance against each other, you might never quite know how good your package is and wrongly assume the quicker driver is extracting everything out of the package. That might not always be true.

[iotar__]

It is remarkable that Rosberg beat Schumacher on points

Remarkably bad if you concider the facts that came out after Schumacher had his tragic skiing incident that when he had his motorcycling accident, it was worse than initially suggested ('just a broken neck, which wasnt nothing to be honest'), as he also had suffered artery damage which caused minor but permanent damage to his motoric functions. He thus 'rebooted' his F1 career with a handicap compared to before.

This gets you stupid votes . How much in tenths of s. did this 'handicap" cost him? No excuses- how much? Why did they hire him, why was Ross Brawn repeating how telemetry showed Schumacher's reactions were as good as ever? In the same vain of internet arm-chair medicine: Massa hard a spring in his head, brain injuries and that was the excuse to bash Alonso for beating him comprehensively. Until Williams times, pole, podiums and outpacing next best thing and future Ferrari driver Bottas (others too).

So Montezemolo's words are some kind of proof? Yes he wasn't the same, he was simply old(er) which unlike those stories is an objective fact that affects physiology, reactions, ability do adjust and perhaps even "motoric functions" . He had a long break, cars were different and so was the competition. He wasn't the sole focus of the team and car wasn't dominant but ~4 best (memory) which adds a lot of competition and makes all your flaws visible.

Using beating Schumacher and Rosberg's early decent seasons at Merc to bash him out of the blue is a very typical behaviour here , equally common is doing it under the guise of supposedly polite and "objective" approach e. i. "Non Hamilton Barcelona crash thread for sophisticated people that avoid reality".

[Just_a_fan]

The reality about Schumacher is that he is not the driving god that some would say. Put any number of top drivers in the same situation as him in 2000-2004 and they would have done as well.

The richest team, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres made for just them, a contractual number 1 driver position with a deferential number 2. Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton would all have won 5 titles in the same situation. As would Hakkinnen, Senna, Prost and others.

There, it's been said.

[LionKing]

There, it's been said.

It might been said but it is still utter bull.

[Manoah2u]

The reality about Schumacher is that he is not the driving god that some would say. Put any number of top drivers in the same situation as him in 2000-2004 and they would have done as well.

The richest team, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres made for just them, a contractual number 1 driver position with a deferential number 2. Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton would all have won 5 titles in the same situation. As would Hakkinnen, Senna, Prost and others.

There, it's been said.

the era before Schumacher @ that same richest team, and the era after Schumacher, a now even richer Ferrari,
show that without Schumi, the team hardly achieves anything but return to its state as it was before Schumi.
It therefore actually shows what a driving god Schumi was.
Barrichello was at the same situation as him, what did he achieve? Irvine was at the same situation as him, what
did he achieve?

the thing is , Schumacher DID this. he made this happen, he steered and engineered it that way.
the fact other drivers have not, shows just what racing god he indeed is.
Look at Alonso, the last person to battle Schumacher 1-on-1 to beat him. He went to Ferrari, and it never happened.
never. We'll have to wait and see what Vettel will do, but as for now, he can't do that either.

Hakkinen could and might have been a contractual nr 1 driver @ Mclaren. Mclaren was filthy rich too. Also unlimited testing. the guy managed to get 2 WDC under the belt and beat that same Schumacher.

Schumacher did EVERYTHING to make sure every single and possible aspect would work into his advantage. That's smart. really smart. It was kindof taking Senna's commitment to a higher level, as Senna was one of the few to actually make sure he's physically advantaged compared to his rivals, like Mansell for example.

It means he outsmarted the rest, and that's why he's the best. Ferrari dominated F1 because of the relentlessness they went into the game. Schumacher covered every aspect, both outside the track, as on the track, as in his mind and body.
Every day of the week, every minute of the day. That's the recipy for greatness. that's why he's the undisputed champion and the recordholder.
Vettel is one of those guys taking his example and doing it. He's come a long way doing that, and i'm very curious how far he will come to be.

[Manu_Forti]

The reality about Schumacher is that he is not the driving god that some would say. Put any number of top drivers in the same situation as him in 2000-2004 and they would have done as well.

The richest team, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres made for just them, a contractual number 1 driver position with a deferential number 2. Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton would all have won 5 titles in the same situation. As would Hakkinnen, Senna, Prost and others.

There, it's been said.

Schumacher started driving in F1 in 1991. Are you even aware of that ??, taking a four year window of a far bigger career and coming to that conclusion is ridiculous. I was at Spa whe he made his debut in Jordan. The guy was every bit as good as they say and he proved it down the years. Repeatedly. He was good behind the wheel, fantastic at building a team around him and only Senna could hold a candle to his ruthlessness and will to win. If I had to build a dream team of F1 from any era he would be driving one car.

Instead of looking at a situation where he had the advantage and maximised it look at the times he didnt .. and STILL won. Barcelona 1994 where he drove most of the race in fifth gear, or Barcelona 1996 where he won in a car that should not have to name me but a few. The guy wone seven titles and deserves every accolade going. I just pray he makes the best recovery he can.

[Just_a_fan]

The reality about Schumacher is that he is not the driving god that some would say. Put any number of top drivers in the same situation as him in 2000-2004 and they would have done as well.

The richest team, unlimited testing, bespoke tyres made for just them, a contractual number 1 driver position with a deferential number 2. Alonso, Vettel and Hamilton would all have won 5 titles in the same situation. As would Hakkinnen, Senna, Prost and others.

There, it's been said.

Schumacher started driving in F1 in 1991. Are you even aware of that ??, taking a four year window of a far bigger career and coming to that conclusion is ridiculous. I was at Spa whe he made his debut in Jordan. The guy was every bit as good as they say and he proved it down the years. Repeatedly. He was good behind the wheel, fantastic at building a team around him and only Senna could hold a candle to his ruthlessness and will to win. If I had to build a dream team of F1 from any era he would be driving one car.

Instead of looking at a situation where he had the advantage and maximised it look at the times he didnt .. and STILL won. Barcelona 1994 where he drove most of the race in fifth gear, or Barcelona 1996 where he won in a car that should not have to name me but a few. The guy wone seven titles and deserves every accolade going. I just pray he makes the best recovery he can.

Oh yes, the old "fifth gear" thing. Williams had Hill try the same thing at a test session and, surprise, he did basically the same performance. It wasn't that special really. Much like people talk about Senna's Donnington performance. He didn't rate it because the technology helped so much. The only people who idolise these things are the media, hungry for a story, and some fans.

Yes, Schumacher made the most of the car given to him but so does every top driver. Alonso's Renault wins, along with Schumacher's Benetton wins, are much more the impressive performances because they were competitive.

Early career performance can be compared to Vettel's first win or Hamilton's first season. Senna's first season was more remarkable really. Alonso shone in the Minardi - anyone watching knew he was special. Many drivers shine in early performances but few take that further.

I don't take anything away from Schumacher for making the most of every opportunity. On the contrary. However, in terms of results, others would have done as well given the full deck he was playing with. The team gave him the car and he maximised it, with the benefit of a subservient second driver of course.

I hope he recovers but I know that it is a forlorn hope. I'm glad I shook his hand and wished him well for the race in Silverstone paddock back in the day, that's for sure. I fear he'll never shake another hand.