Raikkonen offered 5-year Ferrari deal?

[iGav]

Autosport-Atlas is reporting that speculation is mounting that the Kimi-Ferrari deal is now done.

 

[steve_hill4]

Well, it was on the cards during his debut season at Sauber, but he opted for McLaren rather than play second fiddle to Schumacher. Now since he feels he will be playing second fiddle to Montoya, driving alongside a former World Champion that seems to be bothered less and less by winning doesn't seem so bad.

I just hope if he does drive alongside Michael that he gets equal rights at Ferrari from day one. I would also like to see Michael get a few ahead of Senna in the pole position rankings then retire having most of the records under his belt, to be replaced by Rossi. Always liked the idea of another John Surtees in the sport.

 

[AlBDamned]

Autosport-Atlas is reporting that speculation is mounting that the Kimi-Ferrari deal is now done.

I don't buy it. Ferrari at the moment are still the same team they were and have been, but when Michael leaves, Brawnand Todt will go soon after if not at the same time.

McLaren have the infrastructure and experience in place and have the ability to work through bad seasons faster than most and come back to consistently challenge for wins and titles. I don't think Ferrari have those pieces in place and from this angle, a move to Ferrari could only be for financial gain. Their failure this season has been a surprise - there should be no excuses when you're at this level - and although with their trio in place they could well bounce back next year, past the Brawn-Shcumacher-Todt era, I'm of the opinion they will return to the less than prolific status they endured before.

McLaren, Renault, Ferrari, BAR, Toyota, and BMW in that order I would go for.

 

[iGav]

Their failure this season has been a surprise - there should be no excuses when you're at this level

I don't think it's all that surprising when you think about it though.

Especially when one considers the number of rule changes bought in over the last few seasons to try and curb Ferrari's domination after 2002, it was eventually bound to happen.

And finally this season, Michelins suggestion of having 1 tyre per race (Michelin have extensive endurance expertise, Bridgestone do not) finally halted not only Ferrari's domination but neutralised Schumachers trump card, e.g. the ability to drive each and every stint at qualifying pace, something no other driver can do with anywhere near the same levels of consistency.

It's not like the F2005 was an especially bad car, because it's not... it has it's faults that's for sure, but then so does the McLaren (sus reliability).

Had the tyre rules stayed the same this season, Ferrari would likely have won the championship again.

I'm of the opinion they will return to the less than prolific status they endured before.

Whilst their domination can be put down to several things (best driver, most reliable car, consistant and bespoke tyres etc) a significant part of their domination was down to the failure of other teams to mount a credible challenge over a season.

Look at McLaren with the MP4-17D, MP4-18, MP4-18B, MP4-19, MP4-19B, MP4-20 all in the space of 3 seasons, or Williams ill fated 'Tusks', Renaults lack of late season development and switching drivers to an uncompetitive one.

All these factors contributed to Ferrari looking like they were more dominant than they actually were, judging by the competition this season... I doubt we'll see any team approach anywhere near the levels of domination that Ferrari have enjoyed over the last few seasons.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

If the deal is already done I'd be a bit surprised. But I guess it all comes down to Schuey - if Ferrari knows that he is not planning to extend his contract than their best move would be to get Raikkonen now to drive in '07.

Even without Kimi McLaren still has a very creditable challenge to the WDC in Montoya, and with their budget they coud easily pick up one of the several prospects floating around the Red Bull camp...

During qualifying at Interlagos Ferrari had the best time through the speed trap, and the whole season seems to be a struggle to get Bridgestone to make a competitive tire. In fact a Ferrari on Michelins would probably be an entirely different car, and I think the championship would look very different right now.

Kimi and Rossi....still possible....

 

[AlBDamned]

It's not like the F2005 was an especially bad car, because it's not... it has it's faults that's for sure, but then so does the McLaren (sus reliability).

Had the tyre rules stayed the same this season, Ferrari would likely have won the championship again....

.....whilst their domination can be put down to several things (best driver, most reliable car, consistant and bespoke tyres etc) a significant part of their domination was down to the failure of other teams to mount a credible challenge over a season...


...all these factors contributed to Ferrari looking like they were more dominant than they actually were, judging by the competition this season... I doubt we'll see any team approach anywhere near the levels of domination that Ferrari have enjoyed over the last few seasons.

I don't know, Gav. Not making mistakes is part of what being dominant is all about. Just cos the competitors kept making big mistakes doesn't take anything away from Ferrari's achievements and the fact that none of the competitors could mount a serious challenge canan also be construed as Ferrari being as close to perfect as you could conceivably get.

The huge mistake they made at the beginning of this year was trying the old 'we'll try using the old car again' trick which backfired badly.

Ralf Schumacher comes up with the best insights into Ferrari and I don't think it's any coincidence:

"How can they be so arrogant as to try and use last year's car?"

and:

"When Michael leaves, a lot of good people will leave with him".

The tyres were a factor this year –*as we've mentioned before –*but equally, Ferrari took the glory when Bridgestone were well in front so that aspect is swings and roundabouts for me.

Going back to the original point of the thread however, a move to Ferrari, for Raikkonen, is not a move that makes sense to me, money or no money. Dennis would do everything he can to keep that him too, and although Adrian Newey seems to be on yearly contract renewals, McLaren still are one of the top teams for the future, Ferrari less so.

Also: Ferrari may be racing on their own in 2008. Not sure Kimi would be too keen on that, although him and Rossi could keep crowds entertained on their own I suspect...

 

[iGav]

Just cos the competitors kept making big mistakes doesn't take anything away from Ferrari's achievements and the fact that none of the competitors could mount a serious challenge canan also be construed as Ferrari being as close to perfect as you could conceivably get.

It doesn't take anything away from Ferrari's achievements, they've done an outstanding job over the last few seasons... a better job than anyone else, as has their lead driver.

The point I was addressing is that you found their failure surprising and that their should be no excuses for it. I was suggesting reasons for that perceived failure this season. Ferrari's dominance has been magnified in the past by the other teams failure to perform to their potential. Had they performed... then Ferrari wouldn't have looked anywhere near as dominant over the past few seasons, and thus their fall from grace this season wouldn't have looked as spectacular.

My other point, was that (unfair) rules changes have also contributed to Ferrari falling down the order. Not in my memory at least can I remember when so many changes have been bought in over successive seasons to try and curb the dominance of 1 team.

The huge mistake they made at the beginning of this year was trying the old 'we'll try using the old car again' trick which backfired badly.

"How can they be so arrogant as to try and use last year's car?"

In a way Ferrari didn't have a choice though, they stopped developing the F2004 midway through last season, and with them tying up the championships so early last year, it gave them the luxury of a head start in developing this years car. The development of that car had to be scrapped when the rules were revised so late in the season.

Had the rules not changed, I'm of the opinion that Ferrari would have won both titles, that said the season would have been much more competitive, maybe like '03 or '00 than say '02 or '04.

"When Michael leaves, a lot of good people will leave with him".

But they already have personnal in place to replace them when they do eventually retire or leave, Ferrari have made big noises about this being the case. Rory Byrne is likely to retire in the next season or 2... but even then Ferrari already have his replacement (Aldo Cost) designing the cars. Jean Todt won't leave because he's now head of Ferrari. Ross Brawn.. who knows... he's not exactly old and past it.

If Schumacher does retire at the end of next season (likely) then I don't think we'll see Ferrari implode, or become less competitive.

The tyres were a factor this year –*as we've mentioned before –*but equally, Ferrari took the glory when Bridgestone were well in front so that aspect is swings and roundabouts for me.

Ferrari have admitted that their exclusive partnership with Bridgestone has hurt them this season, they've also admitted that there's problems with this seasons chassis because they were thrown by the late rule changes last season.

And the tyre regulations this season have hit Ferrari the most, it's no coincidence that Michelin suggested the 1 tyre rule. It wasn't a fair change, and one that was designed to reduce their competitions competitiveness, whilst playing to their strengths.

Going back to the original point of the thread however, a move to Ferrari, for Raikkonen, is not a move that makes sense to me, money or no money.

I doubt it's money, Kimi is massively frustrated at McLaren, that's plain to see.

McLaren still are one of the top teams for the future, Ferrari less so.

I don't know how you can say McLaren are one of the top teams for the future and Ferrari less so when, Ferrari have just come off 6 straight WCC's and 5 straight WDC's... and only rule changes likely halted that being 7 and 6 respectively.

Yet McLaren failed to win the WDC this season with by far and away the fastest car on the grid.

How does what is currently happening at Mercedes-Benz affect McLaren? there's already rumours that this could very well hurt McLaren's budget... or possibly have even more serious ramifications.

My point being that it's impossible to predict who'll be competitive for the following season. One would have to say that Toyota is probably the best bet for future dominance because they're going to spend their was to the World Championships, then of course Honda won't like that and they'll blow some serious money in order to take the fight to them, and then we might see Renault quit (which they're constantly reviewing if reports are to be believed) or McLaren become a mid field team because Mercedes cuts their budget.

Also: Ferrari may be racing on their own in 2008.

I doubt it. They'll only be one F1 World Championship in 2008.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I doubt it. They'll only be one F1 World Championship in 2008.

I agree. Ecclestone is essentialy giving the teams what they want; there really is little incentive for it now.

 

[AlBDamned]

It doesn't take anything away from Ferrari's achievements, they've done an outstanding job over the last few seasons... a better job than anyone else, as has their lead driver.

The point I was addressing is that you found their failure surprising and that their should be no excuses for it. I was suggesting reasons for that perceived failure this season. Ferrari's dominance has been magnified in the past by the other teams failure to perform to their potential. Had they performed... then Ferrari wouldn't have looked anywhere near as dominant over the past few seasons, and thus their fall from grace this season wouldn't have looked as spectacular.

If Ferrari had dropped back to 4, 5, or 6th position I would still be 'surprised', but the fact that they have effectively fallen off the front of the pack is very 'surprising' regardless of reasons, tyres or whatever. For a top team to simply plummet like they have is pretty much unprecedented bar Williams' Supertec (silvertec? - can't remember) years.

Even the biggest pessamist wouldn't have given Ferrari a season this bad.

It is surprising.

 

[iGav]

For a top team to simply plummet like they have is pretty much unprecedented bar Williams' Supertec

But they 'plummeted' for different reasons, Williams lost an engine deal.

Ferrari 'plummeted' because of excessive rules changes bought in with the sole intention of slashing their domination, whilst handing a sizeable advantage to their competition.

Had the rules not been changed again this season, how do you think Ferrari would have performed this season? when you consider the massive head start they had on the other teams in developing their 2005 car?

It is surprising.

Not with hindsight it isn't.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

I expect to see Ferrari doing much better next season. They have the greatest commitment to F1 of any team, the best driver and a competitive engine.

 

[takao]

I expect to see Ferrari doing much better next season.

actually i would be surprised if they weren't a lot better next year.. didn't they always had the best engines the first year of changed engine rules ?

that aside anbody heard the rumours of a 11th team ?

 

[AlBDamned]

But they 'plummeted' for different reasons, Williams lost an engine deal.

Ferrari 'plummeted' because of excessive rules changes bought in with the sole intention of slashing their domination, whilst handing a sizeable advantage to their competition.

Had the rules not been changed again this season, how do you think Ferrari would have performed this season? when you consider the massive head start they had on the other teams in developing their 2005 car?

I'm not comparing the reasons, I'm just highlighting the only other major fall from grace in the last decade or so. They don't happen too often.

Not with hindsight it isn't.

Ok, ok. In one of the many, many F1 sites and comments that you've read, find me someone who predicted that Ferrari - who apparently everyone knew would be crap this year – actually said, "Ferrari will be a mid-table (positioned 4th-6th in the constructor table) team this year and will struggle to win a single race" (Indy does not count ).

 

[iGav]

that aside anbody heard the rumours of a 11th team ?

Yep

I'm not comparing the reasons, I'm just highlighting the only other major fall from grace in the last decade or so. They don't happen too often.

They happen more often than you think. William's in '88 was far more severe, Benetton in '96, Williams in '98, Williams in '99 or even McLaren and Williams in 2004.

Thing is, I don't think you can ignore the reasons why, you have to differentiate. Ferrari are not in the position they're currently in because they lost an engine deal, or major team personnal left, or that they produced a bad car etc. They're in the position they're in now because of rule changes that effectively took away their domination, and handed a massive advantage to anything with Michelins bolted on.

Ok, ok. In one of the many, many F1 sites and comments that you've read, find me someone who predicted that Ferrari - who apparently everyone knew would be crap this year – actually said, "Ferrari will be a mid-table (positioned 4th-6th in the constructor table) team this year and will struggle to win a single race" (Indy does not count ).

But Ferrari aren't 4th to 6th in the constructors table, they're 3rd and should likely stay that way.

All you have to do is read accounts of winter testing to find out the trouble Ferrari were in with their Bridgestones.

Indy does count though... not Ferrari's fault the other teams turned up with the incorrect equipment.

 

[Lord Blackadder]

But Ferrari aren't 4th to 6th in the constructors table, they're 3rd and should likely stay that way.

All you have to do is read accounts of winter testing to find out the trouble Ferrari were in with their Bridgestones.

Indy does count though... not Ferrari's fault the other teams turned up with the incorrect equipment.

Good point....even though they were purposely hobbled by the rules they still managed to come in third in the constructors championship. Not too shabby.

 

[AlBDamned]

Yep

But Ferrari aren't 4th to 6th in the constructors table, they're 3rd and should likely stay that way.

All you have to do is read accounts of winter testing to find out the trouble Ferrari were in with their Bridgestones.

Indy does count though... not Ferrari's fault the other teams turned up with the incorrect equipment.

Take away their points from Indy and they would be fourth, although admittedly they probably would have scored something there. And 'having trouble with their Bridgestones' does not equal someone predicting their season as it has been, which again, I say has been a surprise.

Also, and I don't genuinely know, how come all the other manufacturers managed to build good cars in time for the 2005 season? Were they party to some secret meetings that Ferrari didn't attend where the 'unfair' rules for 2005 were discussed? I thought all the manufacturers had to agree on the rule changes?

And, what rule other than tyres, were big problems for Ferrari that the other teams didn't also have to face? So big that it put Ferrari back from winning many races to not winning at all (Indy doesn't count ).

There's more news on the original point of this topic if anyone hasn't seen it...

Raikkonen coy over Ferrari links

 

[iGav]

Take away their points from Indy and they would be fourth, although admittedly they probably would have scored something there.

You can't take away their Indy points though by the same reasoning the races where Bridgestone supplied the wrong tyre (Bahrain for example) shouldn't count for the other teams, because the Bridgestone tyre couldn't last the race distance.

Indy was no different to any other race where cars retire.

Also, and I don't genuinely know, how come all the other manufacturers managed to build good cars in time for the 2005 season? Were they party to some secret meetings that Ferrari didn't attend where the 'unfair' rules for 2005 were discussed? I thought all the manufacturers had to agree on the rule changes?

The F2005 isn't a bad car though, it's flawed... but then so is the McLaren (reliabilty) and the Renault (out right speed). It's got the speed though... remember it's frightening pace at Imola, Monaco, and Hungary. It's been seriously quick at other circuits as well, but was hobbled by the poor qualifying performance of the Bridgestones and as a result have found themselves stuck behind Trulli's Mobile Chicane Show several times

Regarding the rule changes, Ferrari have been widely regarded as having the greatest aero efficency of any team on the grid, and thus they had the MOST to lose by any changes to the aero regulations.

I remember reading a comment by Patrick Head (and I'll have to paraphrase it) but he essentially said that the biggest way of crippling Ferrari would be to ban aero, well they obviously can't ban aerodynamics, so they did the next best thing... changed the rules to such an extent it negated Ferrari's aero advantage.

So big that it put Ferrari back from winning many races to not winning at all

The tyres, plain and simple. Bridgestone don't have the endurance experience that Michelin do. Michelin suggested the 1 tyre rule because their experience of building such tyres is VAST, and they KNEW it'd disadvantage Bridgestone. As well as neutralising Schumachers mid race qualifying stints that he can reel off at will. What was once a race divided into several racing stints, has now become a battle of conservation... just incase you push too hard and damage your tyres.

Chassis development can find you tenths, tyres can find you seconds. When the Bridgestones have worked, the Ferrari was devastingly fast, just look at Imola so it demonstrates that the F2005 can't be all that bad.

Ferrari's biggest complaint all season has been about lack of grip... their reliability has been pretty much it's usual exemplary self.

Were they party to some secret meetings that Ferrari didn't attend where the 'unfair' rules for 2005 were discussed?

It's been known to happen. *coughs* Brazil '04 *coughs*

There's more news on the original point of this topic if anyone hasn't seen it...

He's off to Maranello... he knows that Mercedes are going to slash that budget, that McLaren will supply him with an unreliable car just like every year, and that he'll miss out on the Championship again... then he's got to make the right decision for '07 'cos he'll be getting on abit by then.