Quote:
Originally Posted by Racer65
Would the manufacturers want anything to do with an F1 based on Indy type engines though?
Take them away and what do you have? Who's paying the mega bucks for the superstar drivers? In reality that's who 90% of the audience are there for. Not for F1 itself.
It's the super stars that set F1 apart from every other series. Sort out all the aero issues, give them amazing engines but a load of drivers in the cars that the majority of the audience have never heard of and the audience plummets overnight.
To me the only person who seems to understand what makes F1 special these days is Mark Webber.
Like them or loath them it would be commercial suicide for a manufacturer to be seen backing a sport going away from what the public perceive as "green" engines.
|
You say it'd be commercial suicide for a manufacturer to be seen backing something other than "green" engines, whilst countless manufacturers exist in other series which have made no attempt to go green.
Seemed to do just fine for superstars when manufacturers didn't have a monopoly on overly expensive engine regulations.
You've got a weird thing with cause and effect going on. You say that the amazing engines will attract the drivers due to the big bucks and that people won't watch a series with people they haven't heard of. But most drivers are unknowns outside of us super hardcore fans until they reach F1 anyway. It's F1 that makes the name. Damon Hill and Michael Schumacher had a battle royal, and whilst the Renault engine powered both cars in 1995, neither were manufacturer back and both made the name when in F1. I mean, the list of drivers who made their F1 debut without manufacturer backing and became famous afterwards is so long that you'd run out of vertical cells on an excel spreadsheet.
Nobody tunes in to watch an F1 driver's first race because he's already a superstar in F2.