Grand Prix Rejects

Sadly you're probably right, though I don't want you to be I hope he doesn't end up as another unfulfilled potential, though at least he unrejectified himself!

AdrianBelmonte_ wrote:

giraurd wrote:Started following in the late 90's-early noughties and that probably is my least favorite era of F1 - both aestethically and racing-wise. Was just about to come and post those lookers but Simtek was quicker with them. Perfect taste, sir.

Although, the Andrea Moda looked even sleeker with less sponsors!

Although, the Andrea Moda looked even sleeker with less sponsors!

Yes, it does look sleek without any sponsors, but I think it looks even better like this:

I wish Barrichello was still in F1. Blah blah blah.

I wish Nick Heidfeld was still in F1. In fact, I think Quick Nick deserved the McLaren seat in 2002 way more than Kimi.

tBone wrote:I wish Nick Heidfeld was still in F1. In fact, I think Quick Nick deserved the McLaren seat in 2002 way more than Kimi.

I second that.

Rabbi Gordon wrote:

tBone wrote:I wish Nick Heidfeld was still in F1. In fact, I think Quick Nick deserved the McLaren seat in 2002 way more than Kimi.

I second that.

Yeah, but we all know that that would have been the slightly boring choice.

dr-baker wrote:

Rabbi Gordon wrote:

tBone wrote:I wish Nick Heidfeld was still in F1. In fact, I think Quick Nick deserved the McLaren seat in 2002 way more than Kimi.

I second that.

Yeah, but we all know that that would have been the slightly boring choice.

Besides we all know, in hindsight, that Nick Heidfeld is incapable of things like 'winning', so the fact that he deserved or not is irrelevant because back then at McLaren you needed to do things like, you know, winning.

DanielPT wrote:Besides we all know, in hindsight, that Nick Heidfeld is incapable of things like 'winning', so the fact that he deserved or not is irrelevant because back then at McLaren you needed to do things like, you know, winning.

Was Nick incapable of things like 'winning' or were his cars? Of all the cars Heidfeld raced in F1, only one car could win only one GP: the BMW Sauber in 2008. Also, he beat race-winning drivers in the WDC who were his teammate, such as Raikkonen in 2001, Massa in 2002, Webber in 2005 (up to Heidfeld's injury) and Kubica in 2007 and 2009.

I don't think he could have been one of the championship contenders like Alonso and Hamilton, but I have always thought he would have been an excellent second driver for every top team, like Barrichello and Coulthard used to be.

tBone wrote:

DanielPT wrote:Besides we all know, in hindsight, that Nick Heidfeld is incapable of things like 'winning', so the fact that he deserved or not is irrelevant because back then at McLaren you needed to do things like, you know, winning.

Was Nick incapable of things like 'winning' or were his cars? Of all the cars Heidfeld raced in F1, only one car could win only one GP: the BMW Sauber in 2008. Also, he beat race-winning drivers in the WDC who were his teammate, such as Raikkonen in 2001, Massa in 2002, Webber in 2005 (up to Heidfeld's injury) and Kubica in 2007 and 2009.

That only proves he was highly consistent. Which he was. I quite like him but let's face it, winning is not his thing as he has been proving in FE.

DanielPT wrote:

tBone wrote:

DanielPT wrote:Besides we all know, in hindsight, that Nick Heidfeld is incapable of things like 'winning', so the fact that he deserved or not is irrelevant because back then at McLaren you needed to do things like, you know, winning.

Was Nick incapable of things like 'winning' or were his cars? Of all the cars Heidfeld raced in F1, only one car could win only one GP: the BMW Sauber in 2008. Also, he beat race-winning drivers in the WDC who were his teammate, such as Raikkonen in 2001, Massa in 2002, Webber in 2005 (up to Heidfeld's injury) and Kubica in 2007 and 2009.

That only proves he was highly consistent. Which he was. I quite like him but let's face it, winning is not his thing as he has been proving in FE.

The last time he won something was Le Mans 2014. Or Petit Le Mans 2013 if you don't want to count class victories.

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:The last time he won something was Le Mans 2014. Or Petit Le Mans 2013 if you don't want to count class victories.

And even then he was sharing the car with Jani and Prost Jr. The last time he won by himself was in the F3000 round at the A1 Ring in '99 if I'm not mistaken.

Simtek wrote:

UgncreativeUsergname wrote:The last time he won something was Le Mans 2014. Or Petit Le Mans 2013 if you don't want to count class victories.

And even then he was sharing the car with Jani and Prost Jr. The last time he won by himself was in the F3000 round at the A1 Ring in '99 if I'm not mistaken.

Also, Prost Jr. prevented him to win a race in the last year.

Although Heidfeld is incapable of 'winning', answer me this.

Is there anyone on the current grid that provides the same level of excitement as this man does?

FullMetalJack wrote:Although Heidfeld is incapable of 'winning', answer me this.

Is there anyone on the current grid that provides the same level of excitement as this man does?

No. Heidfeld is just...well...the best. Ever.

tBone wrote:

DanielPT wrote:Besides we all know, in hindsight, that Nick Heidfeld is incapable of things like 'winning', so the fact that he deserved or not is irrelevant because back then at McLaren you needed to do things like, you know, winning.

Was Nick incapable of things like 'winning' or were his cars? Of all the cars Heidfeld raced in F1, only one car could win only one GP: the BMW Sauber in 2008. Also, he beat race-winning drivers in the WDC who were his teammate, such as Raikkonen in 2001, Massa in 2002, Webber in 2005 (up to Heidfeld's injury) and Kubica in 2007 and 2009.

I don't think he could have been one of the championship contenders like Alonso and Hamilton, but I have always thought he would have been an excellent second driver for every top team, like Barrichello and Coulthard used to be.

Mind you, had Heidfeld not yielded to the team orders imposed by BMW in favour of Kubica in the 2008 Canadian GP, he probably would have won it instead of Kubica - Kubica's strategy only worked if Heidlfeld let him through in his middle stint, which he did, in order to pull out a gap over Heidfeld.

Alonso should either take a sabbatical or retire this year before he jumps into the car. McLaren are likely going to successfully waste two great talents in Jenson and Fernando, as they languish at the back of the grid all year, desperately trying to pick up points. But whereas Button is ingrained into the team, Alonso has the opportunity with his concussion to just call it a day, and seal his career as an all-time great, because I don't think I could stand to see him fighting with a Force India for that 10th place position, and he has nothing to gain by doing it.

Nah.

By accident or design Alonso has got himself into the position of only looking good this year. If he does end up battling for 10th the perception will be that he's a hero and a lesser driver wouldn't even achieve that (irrespective of where Button places)

Button drove impeccably at the Australian GP this year. You can't fault his performance. Alonso wouldn't have done any better.

Biscione wrote:Button drove impeccably at the Australian GP this year. You can't fault his performance. Alonso wouldn't have done any better.

Well Button has had plenty of experience having driven the crapbox Hondas.

Biscione wrote:Button drove impeccably at the Australian GP this year. You can't fault his performance. Alonso wouldn't have done any better.

No he wouldn't have but had he done the same I believe the perception would be how impressive he was to achieve a finish. Whereas I haven't seen much in the way of praise anywhere for Button. Odd.

CoopsII wrote:

Biscione wrote:Button drove impeccably at the Australian GP this year. You can't fault his performance. Alonso wouldn't have done any better.

No he wouldn't have but had he done the same I believe the perception would be how impressive he was to achieve a finish. Whereas I haven't seen much in the way of praise anywhere for Button. Odd.

I think people are still shocked by how poorly McLaren went (not that it was unexpected, but seeing it has other impact). It also not helped the fact that Alonso was sidelined. Without really knowing what Alonso or Magnussen would do (one can imagine, but only after having Malaysia as evidence in case of Alonso), it is natural people refrain on praising Jenson. On top of this all, it is Button. After his early years, praise doesn't come too often in his way.

I hope F1 implodes and stops.

It's not really an opinion more a sort of hope and it's not because I'm particularly unhappy with the sport, it has it's problems but I believe it's had them before and it will recover. But I'm curious to see what would happen next, splinter series or new FIA Formula RacingTM or whatever. Perhaps those moaning minnies who whine constantly at the moment about just about everything might just realise how good they had it once it's gone.

Long-term I don't see me sticking with F1 anyway as the inevitable pay-per-view deals always appear rip-offs, I don't watch a lot of normal TV so being obliged to pay for a truckload of additional channels sticks in the craw, I won't do it just for F1.

CoopsII wrote:Long-term I don't see me sticking with F1 anyway as the inevitable pay-per-view deals always appear rip-offs, I don't watch a lot of normal TV so being obliged to pay for a truckload of additional channels sticks in the craw, I won't do it just for F1.

This is what I believe is hurting more F1 than anything else. I feel I am going the same way as you regarding to F1 interest. It was always my favorite sport but I hardly see any flyway races these days. It's been happening for some time too...

DanielPT wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Long-term I don't see me sticking with F1 anyway as the inevitable pay-per-view deals always appear rip-offs, I don't watch a lot of normal TV so being obliged to pay for a truckload of additional channels sticks in the craw, I won't do it just for F1.

This is what I believe is hurting more F1 than anything else. I feel I am going the same way as you regarding to F1 interest. It was always my favorite sport but I hardly see any flyway races these days. It's been happening for some time too...

Someone said to me recently that I was the one at fault for thinking like that, because I'd been spoilt by having F1 for free all these years, and that's a point of view often echoed by F1 types. However, in the UK at least, it's not for free and it never was. We pay a licence fee and then the BBC takes the money and makes or purchases programming with it.

CoopsII wrote:Someone said to me recently that I was the one at fault for thinking like that, because I'd been spoilt by having F1 for free all these years, and that's a point of view often echoed by F1 types. However, in the UK at least, it's not for free and it never was. We pay a licence fee and then the BBC takes the money and makes or purchases programming with it.

It is likewise in Portugal, having F1, before going pay TV, in the state controlled channel. We all ended up indirectly paying something. Trouble is, in Portugal, F1 fan base was never that strong and, predictably, didn't pay to watch it. Which is just as well since the sport now comes bundled with all the football related channels. And people pay to watch football. Regardless, F1 started as a flagship sport with prime sport channel honors only to slide in the last few years to the second or even third alternative sport channel they provide in the same pack. It only reflects the loss of audience really...

I would love to see F1 ratings in Portugal, actually. Simply because, I'm pretty sure that F1 has lower ratings than WTCC.

Miguel98 wrote:I would love to see F1 ratings in Portugal, actually. Simply because, I'm pretty sure that F1 has lower ratings than WTCC.

Finding actual viewing figures on the internet isn't all that easy. I mean I only spent a few minutes trying but that's normally enough time to discover the identity of an accused criminal suspect, for example. What I did "learn" was that in the last six years viewers have dropped globally by 175 million whilst pay-per-view contracts have increased. Hmm.

So, sarcastically, can I suggest that maybe F1 sticks an extra wing on each car? See if that helps...

Just give it a couple more years. Formula 1 will have been dumbed down into pay-per-view WWE-style "sports entertainment", a mere charade that has opted to throw out any semblance of actual competition.

I mean, Vince McMahon is rolling in it, ain't he? There must be profit in such a format. It isn't like the XFL where a rival series is being created to compete with the market leader - Bernie already owns it! He can turn the sport into a bonafide scripted soap opera without having to worry about fighting anyone else for viewers! It's perfect!

Biscione wrote:Just give it a couple more years. Formula 1 will have been dumbed down into pay-per-view WWE-style "sports entertainment", a mere charade that has opted to throw out any semblance of actual competition.

I mean, Vince McMahon is rolling in it, ain't he? There must be profit in such a format. It isn't like the XFL where a rival series is being created to compete with the market leader - Bernie already owns it! He can turn the sport into a bonafide scripted soap opera without having to worry about fighting anyone else for viewers! It's perfect!

If anything happens to F1, I'm jumping ship and following IndyCar instead. It was briefly massive worldwide in the mid-1990s thanks to Mansell-Mania, and could be again if F1 implodes? Plus Bernie has nothing to do with it!

In that case now could be Indycars time to shine as heralded not by Mansell Mania but by, uh, Chiltons Challenge! (Once he gets out of Indy Lights obv).

Well, well, well. Looks like IndyCar have the same idea. Have they been reading this thread and getting ideas? If so, good on them!

dr-baker wrote:Well, well, well. Looks like IndyCar have the same idea. Have they been reading this thread and getting ideas? If so, good on them!

They used to have quite a few races outside the US didn't they? What went wrong? As far as now goes, yeah, if they can organise it they're ideally placed to fill to motorsport vacuum that F1 is creating. In the UK I'm sure ITV could afford to screen it or even Channel 5 (as they did with Champcars in the 90s) - they've both got tonnes of cash.

CoopsII wrote:

dr-baker wrote:Well, well, well. Looks like IndyCar have the same idea. Have they been reading this thread and getting ideas? If so, good on them!

They used to have quite a few races outside the US didn't they? What went wrong? As far as now goes, yeah, if they can organise it they're ideally placed to fill to motorsport vacuum that F1 is creating. In the UK I'm sure ITV could afford to screen it or even Channel 5 (as they did with Champcars in the 90s) - they've both got tonnes of cash.

The split is what happened. Although ChampCar did venture to Europe in the early part of the century.

CoopsII wrote:

dr-baker wrote:Well, well, well. Looks like IndyCar have the same idea. Have they been reading this thread and getting ideas? If so, good on them!

They used to have quite a few races outside the US didn't they? What went wrong?

The split. And the brilliant idea of ending the season in August.

CoopsII wrote:Someone said to me recently that I was the one at fault for thinking like that, because I'd been spoilt by having F1 for free all these years, and that's a point of view often echoed by F1 types. However, in the UK at least, it's not for free and it never was. We pay a licence fee and then the BBC takes the money and makes or purchases programming with it.

Forgive me, but as an American I can never wrap my head around this. I understand the basics the BBC is "free" (of commercials) so you have to pay a fee to watch it. But what happens if you don't pay? I'm told those "black vans" are just rumor, so how would they know? Can't you just put up rabbit ears like we do here? I don't have "pay-tv" (much to my wife's dismay) never will, but we still get 23 channels "over the air". And looking at the outside of my house you would never know I even had a TV. Can't you pull something similar off over there?

Admittedly out of those 23 only CBS, NBC and FOX are worth watching (CBS and FOX for football...er handegg, and NBC and FOX for NASCAR, F1, and INDYCAR). Over in America we just flat out wouldn't pay the fee. Hell the change over to digital TV was delayed three separate times since most of us just flat out wouldn't buy the convertor boxes. The government finally had to buy them for us. True Story.

Wallio wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Someone said to me recently that I was the one at fault for thinking like that, because I'd been spoilt by having F1 for free all these years, and that's a point of view often echoed by F1 types. However, in the UK at least, it's not for free and it never was. We pay a licence fee and then the BBC takes the money and makes or purchases programming with it.

Forgive me, but as an American I can never wrap my head around this. I understand the basics the BBC is "free" (of commercials) so you have to pay a fee to watch it. But what happens if you don't pay? I'm told those "black vans" are just rumor, so how would they know? Can't you just put up rabbit ears like we do here? I don't have "pay-tv" (much to my wife's dismay) never will, but we still get 23 channels "over the air". And looking at the outside of my house you would never know I even had a TV. Can't you pull something similar off over there? .

With technology being what it is now they have no more need for the detector vans (which, like you, I always believed contained nothing more than a bored middle aged man, a handle to turn the monitor device and a copy of Rustler magazine) and as the licence fee also covers radio and internet broadcasting there's plenty of ways to be detected. There's dozens of ways to get additional TV that doesn't involve a costly and brutally ugly dish being attached to your house, lots of different brands of Freeview boxes are available for next to nothing.

CoopsII wrote:

Wallio wrote:

CoopsII wrote:Someone said to me recently that I was the one at fault for thinking like that, because I'd been spoilt by having F1 for free all these years, and that's a point of view often echoed by F1 types. However, in the UK at least, it's not for free and it never was. We pay a licence fee and then the BBC takes the money and makes or purchases programming with it.

Forgive me, but as an American I can never wrap my head around this. I understand the basics the BBC is "free" (of commercials) so you have to pay a fee to watch it. But what happens if you don't pay? I'm told those "black vans" are just rumor, so how would they know? Can't you just put up rabbit ears like we do here? I don't have "pay-tv" (much to my wife's dismay) never will, but we still get 23 channels "over the air". And looking at the outside of my house you would never know I even had a TV. Can't you pull something similar off over there? .

With technology being what it is now they have no more need for the detector vans (which, like you, I always believed contained nothing more than a bored middle aged man, a handle to turn the monitor device and a copy of Rustler magazine) and as the licence fee also covers radio and internet broadcasting there's plenty of ways to be detected. There's dozens of ways to get additional TV that doesn't involve a costly and brutally ugly dish being attached to your house, lots of different brands of Freeview boxes are available for next to nothing.

Yeah, and Motors TV is now on Freeview HD TVs and boxes which is awesome.

Jacques Villeneuve is not an unworthy champion and was actually a good driver. I am preparing for the mega hate right about now.....

wmetcalf7 4 wrote:Jacques Villeneuve is not an unworthy champion and was actually a good driver. I am preparing for the mega hate right about now.....

I don't believe there's such a thong as an "unworthy" champion in F1. At least, I don't think any of the world champions are undeserving, and yes Villeneuve was a good driver. He's just not a "great" driver, like Schumacher or his father. The reason people don't like him is mainly to do with the fact that he's an asshat.

Simtek wrote:

wmetcalf7 4 wrote:Jacques Villeneuve is not an unworthy champion and was actually a good driver. I am preparing for the mega hate right about now.....

I don't believe there's such a thong as an "unworthy" champion in F1. At least, I don't think any of the world champions are undeserving, and yes Villeneuve was a good driver. He's just not a "great" driver, like Schumacher or his father. The reason people don't like him is mainly to do with the fact that he's an asshat.

People also don't like a champion who doesn't seem to have had to work hard to get it. Villeneuve jumped straight into the best car on the grid in his 1st year and won the title in his 2nd. Same can be said for Hamilton. Vettel was always Red Bull's golden boy and probably would have been promoted to Red Bull even if he hadn't won the Italian GP with Toro Rosso and lucked into a good car. All are relatively unpopular champions.