Hamilton to Mercedes? BBC
- Thread starter JonnyGLC
- Start date
- Status
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
Title winning he'd be maybe worse off, maybe not. What happens if Merc do a Brawn and pull out some massive advantage and win the title next year, realistically any car with some proper money in can do that. Financially, in almost every way Hamilton would be better off at Mercedes.
Ultimately, money talks, 20mil and no title at Merc, 8mil and no title at Mclaren... which would you choose? If Hamilton doesn't win the title this year, that will basically be what this season is about as well, no title and a lot less money, though it would be closer this year.
The post above with the quote is certainly interesting. Will Mclaren get better when they have to spend a lot of the budget on an engine and have less money, Mercedes are pumping in investment and at some point extra staff levels will likely show up in car performance, and they haven't been a million miles off this year, likewise they haven't had a top driver in the team, for my money Alonso/Hamilton at Mercedes and it would have got a lot more points than it has done with the current drivers.
Turning down maybe 2-2.5times the money on the basis that Mclaren might have another good year is.... financially stupid. Considering realistically any of the top 3-4 cars could fluke onto some rule change new piece of equipment that gives a stonking advantage, I'm not sure going for anything but the best contract is a good idea. He can't be sure where the next best drive is, it could be anywhere.... he CAN be sure where the best contract is.... I know which I'd choose.
8m is not a massive hole in McLaren's budget, although its not insignificant.
I think taking the biggest money deal on the basis that McLaren might build a lemon and Mercedes might do a Brawn is a bit silly. I'd also like to think that F1 drivers are in the sport for more than just the pay cheque.
£8m and a chance to win the title, or £20m and a chance to fight for the tail end of the points is (should) be a decision thats about more than just money for an F1 driver.
I think taking the biggest money deal on the basis that McLaren might build a lemon and Mercedes might do a Brawn is a bit silly. I'd also like to think that F1 drivers are in the sport for more than just the pay cheque.
£8m and a chance to win the title, or £20m and a chance to fight for the tail end of the points is (should) be a decision thats about more than just money for an F1 driver.
Last edited:
One of the reasons why, if he does go to Mercedes he's stopped being a racer and turned into a media and exposure hungry retard. I'm not a huge hamilton fan but i do like to see a Brit win. If he goes to Merc for more money and more image rights control then I will no longer be ANY sort of fan.
Is this not what David Beckham did when he went to USA, to play soccer? He has and will earn LOADS due to his increased fame. I was watching Hell's Kitchen the other day and even the chefs knew who Beckham was. This will serve him well, after his playing career is finished.
Personally, I think Hamilton will stay at McLaren. Even if MSc retires, I do not believe Hamilton would move to Merc, unless he is given outright No.1 status...and I'm not sure if Rosberg's contract allows for this.
McLaren wouldn't necessarily be in such a bad place if Hamilton left. They would focus their efforts on Button's 2013 title challenge and this may inadvertently increase their chances of winning the 2013 Drivers title (not the Constructors title).
Caporegime
- Joined
- 18 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 33,188
You're assuming £8mil and a shot at the title vs £20mil and no shot, if at the end of next season Mclaren are 5th/6th, Merc are 3rd/4th people will be laughing at Hamilton for being 10-15mil worse off and further behind.
I think people are mistaking the whole brawn fluked onto a good car thing as a one off. Red Bull for me, have cheated their way through the past two seasons by doing the same thing as Brawn. In fact I don't think we've had a title winning car since Brawn started, which hasn't had some fundamental, rule bending piece of tech that gives a car a massive advantage. They finally took out most of the parts that made that Red Bull what it was, and suddenly they're missing out on Q3 in qualifying, breaking down more often(less crusing about at the front and more trying their hardest), they look visibly much slower and the lack of straight line speed with no advantage in the corners has taken them out of the equation.
So yes, for me the car that reads the rules best, or should I say, comes up with something that passes testing but is realistically against the rules, has a great shot at winning the title.
Merc aren't bad this year, put Hamilton/Alonso in the current Merc and for me they'd have more wins, qualify higher and a heck of a lot more points and that is a car that has been missing half its team and half its money for a couple years. Can Mclaren put in a full on title winning car next year, sure, if anyone in the top 4-5 teams figures out a rule bending huge advantage, it could be anyone really.
If Hamilton was at Ferrari or even Red Bull I'd say moving for money alone would be stupid, but Mclaren while a HUGE name, haven't been particularly competitive for years. Staying at Mclaren is as big a risk in my eyes as moving to Merc. He can go to Merc on a 1 or 2 year contract, make much more money and maybe have much better options in a couple years. Maybe Merc become the best car, maybe Red Bull lose a driver maybe Mclaren have the best car for the next few years. Without ANY certainty over who will have the best car next year, it seems absurd to do anything but go for the best contract you can get.
The best car next year could be any one of 5 different cars, 1 in 5 chance to be in a title capable car, 80% chance you WON'T be. I'd prefer to get myself 20mil and a 1 in 5 chance rather than 8mil and a 1 in 5 chance.
Fluked, you have either got into f1 since you fell in love with hamilton or have exactly no knowledge past what planet f1 tells you. You must have literally the engineering comprehension of a chimp if you think they spent all that money on a honda that was a fluke. Or that since Red Bull just cheated their way to a title so we haven't had a true 'winning car' since Brawn.
So you think no one else has cheated/bent the limits on the way to titles previous or in the challenge of catching these 'cheats'. You really are niave enough to think there isn't a single item on hamiltons title winning car that was illegal. Hell we know they were stealing ferrari info so I take it you disregard hamiltons title as well?
No I thought not.
Soldato
I can't help but agree with the drunken on. Stick a better driver in that Merc and I would expect better results from them.
Man of Honour
Thats one of the main negatives with F1. The teams are encouraged to be creative to exploit loopholes, so whoever figures something out first usually wins the championship.
A good chunk of titles were won that way, rather than with raw ability
I'd kill to see an F1 where there are no restrictions on anything so it's all fair game. 12v turbos etc
A good chunk of titles were won that way, rather than with raw ability
I'd kill to see an F1 where there are no restrictions on anything so it's all fair game. 12v turbos etc
That's stating the obvious. Stick a better driver than Alonso in the ferrari and they will get better results. So hamilton is in MS's car this year instead of MS. He might have got a win, but he can't fix all the other issues that have stopped MS from scoring points.
Even if he scored 25% more points than the current drivers he still would be no where in the title battle.
I think assuming a continuation of the status quo is less off-the-wall than assuming a massive shake up.
Of course there is the posibility that Merc could build a title winning car while McLaren drop backwards, but given the past, the current rules, and the fact were well into the time when teams will have built their 2013 cars I think a continuation of the 'as is' is the far more likely outcome.
It really is not that simple. Why 1 in 5? Why not 1 in 12? Surely any team can 'cheat' into a fast car? And why the assumption that every team has the same chance to produce the fastest car? What makes you think Merc are as likely to make the fastest car as RBR or McLaren? Using your logic, every driver has a 1 in 12 chance of being in the right car and should just sign for whatever team offers them the most money, regardless of any past success or future prospects. If HRT offered £21m, should he just go there?
Last edited:
How do you define competitive?
Constructors championship:
2011 2nd
2010 2nd
2009 3rd
2008 2nd
2007 1st (but stripped of all points due to espionage ruling)
2006 3rd
2005 2nd
http://www.motorsport.com/#!/f1/news/mercedes-offering-schumacher-2013-contract-report/
BILD are usually spot on when it comes to mercedes
fixed
Schumacher still makes a lot of sense for Merc. He is driving well enough (this year's points reflect the car/team unreliability) and his brand value must be worth millions to the team.
- Status