Is 10 teams too few?
17th March 2011, 13:27 at 1:27 pm #129042
Ecclestone is apparently pushing for a maximum of 10 teams for 2013, by removing the slowest and weakest.
No, I have no problem with kicking the slow-coaches out of the sport, especially if the chances of them getting better is slim (i.e. Hispania). But I don’t think 10 teams is a good idea. I’m not sure I’d want more than 13 that we have currently, but I couldn’t really imagine dropping back to 2009 levels.
What are your thoughts? How many teams would you ideally have on the grid, and do you even see need to get rid of the slow ones?17th March 2011, 13:35 at 1:35 pm #163614
I think he’s just sending a message to Virgin and Hispania: find some speed, or find a new series to race in. If one or both team could compete with the others, then I don’t think Ecclestone would object to their presence at all.17th March 2011, 13:48 at 1:48 pm #163615
Yes, 10 is too few. A ruling like that would also send out the message that F1 is a closed shop which no one is allowed to break into, so no one will bother. Team the financial hoops teams have to jump through just to get into F1 with an elitist attitude and it’ll be the begining of the end for F1.
I hate the pressure that is being put on HRT and Virgin, which is essentially “speed up or f*** off”(I am guilty of this too I admit), because for proper F1 fans like us the battle at the middle and the back of the grid is just as important as the one at the front.17th March 2011, 13:55 at 1:55 pm #163616
Hadn’t heard that BE was pushing for this…seems odd since only a few years ago, post-manufacturer-exodus, they were trying to invite new teams, and talked of making it more affordable for them to enter and stay in F1 and get competitive more quickly than in the past. They talked of budget caps that would give new potential team owners some assurance that they wouldn’t go bankrupt trying to field a few cars for a small number of years until they could get somewhat respectable.
Stability in the rules would go a long way to ensuring there aren’t so many slow teams out there, or teams that are so much slower than the ‘have’ teams. Ten teams to me sound like not enough, and sounds like it would be an even more elite group than we currently have, lacking in ‘newness’ and limiting the driver market. I suppose I wouldn’t have a problem with 10 teams if they were all strong…that would make for some wicked racing…and I suppose limiting the number of teams, or let’s word it as getting rid of the slowest teams, would eliminate some of the drivers that don’t really belong on the grid and are only there because they brought money to the table for their ride on teams that need the money and cannot attract the best drivers until they show some competitiveness…
Anyhoo…I guess I’m indifferent to the number of teams, but 20 cars sounds kind of sparse, unless they are close in performance to each other and they can get away from the parade mentality in F1. 10 teams sounds kind of limiting in terms of new entrants (as in, the doors are closed), but maybe to BE that signals some stability in and of itself…17th March 2011, 13:57 at 1:57 pm #163617
Exactly GeeMac. We had very few blue flag incidents last year and BE is just worried about people thinking F1 has got sluggish.
F1 is the top level of motorsport but it needs to have it’s feet firmly on the ground, particularly if they want to entice manufacturers back to the sport in the future. Having said that, 14 teams should be the limit.17th March 2011, 15:28 at 3:28 pm #163618
I think we have it about right now, look at the grid at a race start and it is nice an full, I don’t think you could squeeze many more cars in on the start finish straight at some circuits, now compare the grid to the MotoGP grid which looks deserted!
It is about the only good thing to come out of the Budget restriction agreement (or whatever it is called)!17th March 2011, 16:13 at 4:13 pm #163619
Yes, as a grid of 20 cars just doesn’t look full enough!17th March 2011, 16:31 at 4:31 pm #163620
Indeed!17th March 2011, 17:56 at 5:56 pm #163621
I don’t think it’s too few. It doesn’t mean we should be pushing for it, though.17th March 2011, 20:14 at 8:14 pm #163622
Way to few, Teams will find some pace but slow cars have been around for as long as F1 has been in existance. Keep as it is, theres a revolving door in F1 and as soon as someone leaves, another enters.17th March 2011, 23:29 at 11:29 pm #163623
Is 10 teams too few?
20-car grids at Sepang, Shanghai and the like look pathetically small. They should be aiming for 26.
Ecclestone only wants it cut to ten teams so he can reduce how much he has to pay out.
He’s thinking short-term, not long-term. More teams equals more drivers, which means a greater chance to represent more countries and increase the reach of F1.18th March 2011, 1:08 at 1:08 am #163624
Thank you, Keith, for pointing out the major flaws with Mr. Ecclestone’s logic. You think we might see an article regarding this issue? I for my part, as a F1 fan, am very much offended by this and consider this statement much worse than anything else Ecclestone has blabbered in the last months (well, maybe the artificial rain thing – but it’s damn close).
Aside from the point you mentioned about increasing the reach of Formula 1 there is another essential point why having as many teams as possible is important: people are complaining about a lack of seats for talented young drivers. Where do places for young drivers come from, from previous F1 history? Correct, small teams.18th March 2011, 1:44 at 1:44 am #163625
More teams equals more drivers, which means a greater chance to represent more countries and increase the reach of F1.
The long-term appeal is no doubt something Ecclestone is acutely aware of. I just think he’d rather see Virgin and Hispania off the grid than languishing three and four seconds off the pace. If they were able to close up the gap to the midfield, then I don’t think he’d object to them at all. I think he’d just prefer ten excellent teams rather than ten good teams and two only okay ones.18th March 2011, 2:22 at 2:22 am #163626
I want there to be enough cars to put the letters DNQ back into play.18th March 2011, 2:53 at 2:53 am #163627
That will never happen. Teams will not join the sport if there is a chance they will not be able to race. It’s simply too expensive.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.