f1
Latest News:

2018 French Grand Prix Countdown

Days
Hours
Minutes
Seconds

University article - The rise and fall of Williams
MartiniSalad (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 12:00
I've been inactive on here for so long, time flies by. I've been set a task at my university to write a feature article, and one idea that's been gloating in my head for it is to get fans' perspective on the rise and fall of Williams, as it's a topic with many twists, turns and is interesting to recite. If anyone on here is willing to retell stories, describe why things went wrong, where they went wrong and how they could or should be put right, that would be amazing. The Renault split and Newey leaving? The BMW saga? Pay drivers? Also, the good times, our 7 world champions? The recent rise wirh Merc engines? Frank's miracle recovery? Basically, relive what you feelare the highest and lowest points of the team, and the most particular moments in history that stand out to you. Pinpoint where you thought things were at their best, and worst. Hopefully I can make an article that does the history of Williams justice, and it would be great to make an article about the fans, the nost important people in any sport.



You can only get over your fears if you attack them head on - Mika Hakkinen

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
Marco Cardoso (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 12:02
Williams is beying very dissapoint for fans.
Google Williams news and It doesn't take much to see what people think of Williams in our days.



https://goo.gl/images/VESYsm

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
MartiniSalad (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 12:07
True, but this isn't just the future, it might feel like stating the obvious but having plenty of fans describe plenty of meaningful moments throughout Williams' history and different opinions on said times would be great.



You can only get over your fears if you attack them head on - Mika Hakkinen

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
Rosberg (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 12:50
Adrian Newey - it was a fatal mistake by Frank and Patrick to ignore Adrian's request to consult him in the team's driver hiring decision which led to him leaving end of 96. Since then, the team hasn't been the same. Imagine giving Adrian shares of the team and he remains with us until today, the BMW era wouldn't be so bad and our sponsorship situation would never have been a problem.

Patrick and Frank were so arrogant to ignore the repeated requests of Newey, despite this written in his contract. My impression is that the two of them didn't want to dilute their ultimate power in controlling the direction of the team and see what happened after 97?

Can you see how stupid Frank and Patrick were? They pushed him out basically!!! All other F1 teams were fighting to hire him ..... Jaguar was trying to poach him from McLaren, Ron Dennis tried his best to hold on to him, Ferrari tried to get him many times, Red Bull did everything to keep him in their stable, yet Frank and Patrick didn't care a bit.



https://s19.postimg.org/vdj61d6cj/Rosberg.jpg



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 13/12/2017 13:03 by Rosberg.

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
GiorgioF1 (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 13:39
Newey's designed car with Rosberg, Kubica and BMW Power and maybe even Toyota in late 2000's (Sm71)

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
MartiniSalad (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 14:45
Come to think of it, I wouldn't mind writing about the 21st century of Williams. The topics that interest me for an article are the BMW era, subsequent wilderness years and the hybrid power renaissance. This is where the crux of the falling and rising is.



You can only get over your fears if you attack them head on - Mika Hakkinen

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
Mehryar (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 16:30
Re-2000s and Bmw era, you can say it was as good as it could get.there was no way to do any better if you check it in one piece, one picture.
In 2000 and 2001 we had a good chasis, the engine itself was unreliable and for sometime in first year, not a match for the main rivals.2002 was so-so with chasis not being a match for Ferrari, nor was the engine reliability.
2003 was the year we had a better chasis overally, BMW @#$%& up with failires yet again.2004 was underperforming year of Williams and last year was an equal effort by both parties to be not good enough.
The problems were actually from BMW side of garage imo.they were there only for money and for that, they needed a very short time to start winning titles which is not the case in F1.yet you can say the timeline of imroving from zero to having a car capable of winning titles was 3 yrs which is the shortest you can find between those who entered with a plan in recent history.it took longer for Renault, RBR and Mercedes to reach that level...yet they lost it because of bmw itself not williams chasis.
When you see your team is doing ok with the given engine and its reliability, one would wonder why should we sell shares to BMW.in fact they should first make their unit reliable, first do their job right and then ask for a share in team to correct the chasis side.the future of BMW showed very well that Williams decision was 100% right to not sell shares to Bmw.otherwise our team could be sold to an unknown russian billioner or someone from middle east for example and then after 2-3yrs of hard times, we were history.

Re-Newey, it's been said to be the biggest mistake of Williams history but maybe not to that extend some of us imagine.the reality is Newey was never given shares in Mclaren and RBR as far as I know, so why he left? He could stay and the time could come later for him to be the teams boss or shareholder in Williams rather leaving for Mclaren and RbR where he was never a team boss, not a share holder too.so maybe it had levels of changing teams for new challenges than wanting shares alone as a reason.
On the other hand, Williams cars were all penned by Head/Newey.not without reason.they were babies of both, not Newey alone.Head had equal share in producing those cars if not having more.we were winning before Newey joining and we won after he left the team.
You can say the break up and seeing the results of Head and Newey in cars they later designed, confirms they were equally brilliant and equally been hit by not doing it under one roof.it took 6 yrs till Head made a brilliant car again.considering 98 Mclaren car was designed before Newey arrival and 99 car was an evolution of the project, it took till 2005 that he came out with a great chasis too.

So overally I don't see these reasons like Newey departure or Bmw era as the main reasons of this.I think firstly this is a natural process for independed teams like us and Mclaren to experience periods of dire results.F1 got too big from any aspect, turned to an spending course between big spenders who want to sell something and in this field, it's clear top men will finish in a Mercedes or Rbr.they pay more, they have better facilities and they beat us for getting best minds.the downfall was and is a natural process as you can see it's 20yrs since Mclaren won a WCC too....but one thing they did which we did not and that was starting to make road cars, which is helping the team from any aspect.that's why they lasted for longer at the top and probably will be back sooner.it is a better known brand, you can be a non-f1 fan and still have heard about Mclaren.this makes life easier if you want to get sponsers (not by fantasy world Ron was living which made Mclaren without a title sponsers for a long time).

Last word, the downfall was a mixture of natural evolution of the sport and the fact that we did not react to fast changing nature of F1 by not starting a proper road cars brand & company.staying small in a world which is getting bigger means downfall till the time the world gets smaller again (with budget cap) or us getting bigger (by a breakthrough season or a works deal)



http://img150.imageshack.us/img150/1095/mehryarsigyo7.gif

Dylan's Together Through Life Hits The Stores.

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
Darron (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 18:34
I read an article many years ago by Patrick Head, where he talks about the fall from the top 1998 onwards. He mentions that the team were so focussed on winning the championships in 1994-1997, along with regrouping after Senna’s accident and the manslaughter charges that were hanging over the team that they didn’t really plan for the future. McLaren were rebuilding and investing during their slump and Ferrari were building the dream team. They got left behind and they haven’t really been able to make the lost ground up

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
phatjack (IP Logged)
13 December, 2017 23:50
So if we help you write the article do we get credited?

 
Re: University article - The rise and fall of Williams
MartiniSalad (IP Logged)
14 December, 2017 12:45
It won't be published, it's something that's going to just be marked by a lecturer, but if it were to be published I would of course credit people involved.



You can only get over your fears if you attack them head on - Mika Hakkinen


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
We record all IP addresses on the Sportnetwork message boards which may be required by the authorities in case of defamatory or abusive comment. We seek to monitor the Message Boards at regular intervals. We do not associate Sportnetwork with any of the comments and do not take responsibility for any statements or opinions expressed on the Message Boards. If you have any cause for concern over any material posted here please let us know as soon as possible by e-mailing abuse@sportnetwork.net
 
 

Who is online?

Total users online:  

Most users online:  

Users on this site:  

Where are they?