Silly Season 2020/2021 (starting with silliness in 2019)

[Just_a_fan]

As ive said, im thinking this will be the grid for 2021:
Bottas to Renault (Three year deal)
Russell to Mercedes (Three Year Deal)
Hamilton to Aston Martin (Two Year Deal) - Toto to join as Team principle
Alonso to Mercedes (Two year deal)
Vettel back to Red Bull (Two year deal)

Leaving the grid as follows:
Mercededs AMG: 14) Alonso / 63) Russell
Red Bull-Honda: 33) Verstappen / 5) Vettel
Scuderia Ferrari: 16) Le Clerc / 55) Sainz
McLaren-Mercedes: 3) Riccardo / 4) Norris
Aston Martin-Mercedes: 44) Hamilton / 11) Perez
Renault Sport F1: 77) Bottas / 31) Ocon
Alfa Romeo-Ferrari: 99) Giovinazzi / 32 or 19) Schumacher [32 or 19 as they were his dads first numbers in F1]
Alfa Tauri-Honda: 23) Albon / 10) Gasly
Haas-Ferrari 20) Magnussen / 94) Wehirlien
Williams-Mercedes: 6) Latifi / 27) Hulkenberg

That looks like a wish list rather than reality.

I don't see Hamilton leaving Mercedes. He's mates with Toto, yes, but Aston Martin aren't going to suddenly become title contenders overnight. Also, why would Perez be at Aston with Hamilton? Stroll will be in one of the cars - Daddy didn't buy the team to stick someone else in the car.

Thus no Alonso at Mercedes. Russell? Yes, I can see that. Bottas dropped in to the midfield would be typical F1. UNless he can take the fight to Hamilton in this coming "strange season". He needs to be pushing Hamilton hard at every race to keep his seat.

Vettel at Red Bull with Max? No chance. Red Bull have firmly placed their eggs in Max's basket and won't want to deal with the friction of having Vettel there "with something to prove" before he finally retires.

[PlatinumZealot]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

[Jolle]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

They are building a team around Leclerc as their main man. Ricciardo is quick, but not a supporting driver, or not (yet) willing to take that role. He’s more an Irvine then a Barrichello.

[Polite]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

They are building a team around Leclerc as their main man. Ricciardo is quick, but not a supporting driver, or not (yet) willing to take that role. He’s more an Irvine then a Barrichello.

imo,
1) age and good manners
2) salary
3) racecraft

Sainz is really good in race, brings points, never a mistake in the first lap.

dont think Ricciardo were too quick Vs Leclerc.. they are both on top.

[Scorpaguy]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

My guess would be the "Loose Cannon" theory. While I certainly do not believe Ric to be such, I do believe that Ferrari want total control of their driver's comments...and Ric has a tendency to "speak his mind" at times.

Actually, I would have lost a bet on this; I truly believed Ric to be the obvious choice...but in retrospect, "obvious" is not always synonymous with logical and strategical. Or to make a finer point, the logical and strategical rationale for the race team may not be so logical and strategical for the overall brand. In the end, it is the almighty dollar/euro that make these decisions and the BOD at Ferrarihave no appetite for "free lancing"...thus, Ric is out (and why Ham never gets the tap) IMHO.

[Jolle]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

My guess would be the "Loose Cannon" theory. While I certainly do not believe Ric to be such, I do believe that Ferrari want total control of their driver's comments...and Ric has a tendency to "speak his mind" at times.

Actually, I would have lost a bet on this; I truly believed Ric to be the obvious choice...but in retrospect, "obvious" is not always synonymous with logical and strategical. Or to make a finer point, the logical and strategical rationale for the race team may not be so logical and strategical for the overall brand. In the end, it is the almighty dollar/euro that make these decisions and the BOD at Ferrarihave no appetite for "free lancing"...thus, Ric is out (and why Ham never gets the tap) IMHO.

I think it's time for. a "what is the best way to pair two driver together" again

I think, the best way to maximize outcome, if you have a team to go for the WDC is to have the drivers 1. not crash into each other and 2. have the number two driver finish behind the number one (and choose WC) as much as possible.

Sainz is a very good choice, he doesn't crash into his teammates (he knows when to give way) and probably, Leclerc is just that thad quicker to have him finish behind him.

Ric would probably collect more points in a season then Sainz, but also at the cost of Leclerc, who has to fight Hamilton and Verstappen, who have Bottas and Albon as a clear number two.

Just look how many point were lost last year between Vettel and Leclerc. Vettel finished 9 times in front of Leclerc and they crashed into each other once. If Sainz was in the car last year, good chance Verstappen would be fourth, not third in the standings, maybe Leclerc could even knock Bottas from second place. Verstappen only finished behind his teammate three times. Hamilton six, but more then half of those when the championship was more or less safe.

[Scorpaguy]

...another thing to remember is that in the past, Big Red coveted the WCC as much (if not more) than the WDC. While times have now changed a bit I suppose, I would not be surprised if Ferrari would be just as happy with a WCC won in a season with no drama as they would be with a WDC won in a season where their drivers were constantly bickering and crashing into one another.

[Jolle]

...another thing to remember is that in the past, Big Red coveted the WCC as much (if not more) than the WDC. While times have now changed a bit I suppose, I would not be surprised if Ferrari would be just as happy with a WCC won in a season with no drama as they would be with a WDC won in a season where their drivers were constantly bickering and crashing into one another.

that is a long long time in the past... ever since PM came on board in '96 there has always been a clear no. 1 that was their WDC "hope": (Schumacher, Raikkonen, Alonso and Vettel)

[PlatinumZealot]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

My guess would be the "Loose Cannon" theory. While I certainly do not believe Ric to be such, I do believe that Ferrari want total control of their driver's comments...and Ric has a tendency to "speak his mind" at times.

Actually, I would have lost a bet on this; I truly believed Ric to be the obvious choice...but in retrospect, "obvious" is not always synonymous with logical and strategical. Or to make a finer point, the logical and strategical rationale for the race team may not be so logical and strategical for the overall brand. In the end, it is the almighty dollar/euro that make these decisions and the BOD at Ferrarihave no appetite for "free lancing"...thus, Ric is out (and why Ham never gets the tap) IMHO.

True.. Danny seems to be less "compliant" and more outspoken. Carlos lets not forget is also very emotional as we see on "Drive to survive" but he seems to be very professional in how and when he shows it. Danny controls his emotions too but he bubbles over a bit infront of the cameras before he walks away to smash things. Ha. Aussie grit and big dick energy may not have rub Ferrari the right way.

[raymondu999]

...another thing to remember is that in the past, Big Red coveted the WCC as much (if not more) than the WDC. While times have now changed a bit I suppose, I would not be surprised if Ferrari would be just as happy with a WCC won in a season with no drama as they would be with a WDC won in a season where their drivers were constantly bickering and crashing into one another.

Really? I think Ferrari would rather end lower in WCC if it meant higher WDC.

[Moore77]

...another thing to remember is that in the past, Big Red coveted the WCC as much (if not more) than the WDC. While times have now changed a bit I suppose, I would not be surprised if Ferrari would be just as happy with a WCC won in a season with no drama as they would be with a WDC won in a season where their drivers were constantly bickering and crashing into one another.

Really? I think Ferrari would rather end lower in WCC if it meant higher WDC.

Did Ferrari ever made either a direct statement or a statement that would mean this?

[Scorpaguy]

...another thing to remember is that in the past, Big Red coveted the WCC as much (if not more) than the WDC. While times have now changed a bit I suppose, I would not be surprised if Ferrari would be just as happy with a WCC won in a season with no drama as they would be with a WDC won in a season where their drivers were constantly bickering and crashing into one another.

Really? I think Ferrari would rather end lower in WCC if it meant higher WDC.

Did Ferrari ever made either a direct statement or a statement that would mean this?

I assume Big Red has never made such a statement. However, I always seem to remember there being chatter about the WCC being a big deal to them...in the 60's and 70's. Then in the 80's things began to change. Yes, such could be my imagination, but such chatter seems real to my horrifically old memory. That, and also such seems to fit with Enzo's mantra of the "Brand" being paramount.

[FrukostScones]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

[TimW]

I get why Ferrari wanted Carlos Sainz but I am still trying to understand, what did they not like about Daniel Ricciardo?

Prima Donna behaviour?
Salary Demands?
Was he too quick a driver?

My guess would be the "Loose Cannon" theory. While I certainly do not believe Ric to be such, I do believe that Ferrari want total control of their driver's comments...and Ric has a tendency to "speak his mind" at times.

Actually, I would have lost a bet on this; I truly believed Ric to be the obvious choice...but in retrospect, "obvious" is not always synonymous with logical and strategical. Or to make a finer point, the logical and strategical rationale for the race team may not be so logical and strategical for the overall brand. In the end, it is the almighty dollar/euro that make these decisions and the BOD at Ferrarihave no appetite for "free lancing"...thus, Ric is out (and why Ham never gets the tap) IMHO.

True.. Danny seems to be less "compliant" and more outspoken. Carlos lets not forget is also very emotional as we see on "Drive to survive" but he seems to be very professional in how and when he shows it. Danny controls his emotions too but he bubbles over a bit infront of the cameras before he walks away to smash things. Ha. Aussie grit and big dick energy may not have rub Ferrari the right way.

Somehow I doubt Sainz is that compliant, at Torro Rosso there seemed to be politics and conflict, leading ultimately to RB letting him go, when he was clearly above e.g Kyvat. But maybr Max's "no" played a role in things turning sour.

Guess he accepted an explicit contractual no. 2 role to get a top drive.

[Xwang]

I hope this is the correct place where to post this.
I've just read this one and some of the comments:
https://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/raci ... n=widget-6
and I'm wondering:
is post covid-19 F1 moving from engineering excellence to bean counting excellence?