Rick Mears at Brabham
#1
Posted 15 April 2008 - 09:10
I once heard (seriously) that when the drive was offered and a fee was discussed Bernie said
"Will a million bucks be OK for you Rick?"
The reply was favourable.
"Good" said Bernie, " Can I have the cheque by next week?"
I wonder if thats how the printed version will run?
Advertisement
#2
Posted 15 April 2008 - 09:49
F1's loss, imho.
The story (or derivatives of it) has been touted almost since the day it happened.
#3
Posted 15 April 2008 - 10:05
Originally posted by jcbc3
F1's loss, imho.
Agreed. Rick was, and still is, a class act.
#4
Posted 15 April 2008 - 12:43
I recall well seeing him at the inaugural CART Molson Indy event in Toronto in 1986. I was spectating about 1/2 round the circuit for the race and was mightily impressed by his drive. More so than anyone else, in fact. He positioned his car with monotonous precision...hitting the same marks, lap after lap after lap. And this was subsequent to his devasting Sanair shunt.
#5
Posted 15 April 2008 - 13:40
#6
Posted 15 April 2008 - 18:47
Anyway, I hoped for many years that Rick would end up in F1 - surely the negotiations took longer than that!
Anyway, it's a big shame that the Concorde Agreement virtually killed this and similar deals by not allowing an occasional third entry for a team, so that Rick could "feel" himself in like Mario all those years ago. Having just said that, I do recall Jonathan Palmer in a third Williams, and Franz Hesnault in a third Renault...
#7
Posted 16 April 2008 - 00:26
Maybe Roebuck will put that answer here someday... http://www.motorsportmagazine.co.uk/
#8
Posted 16 April 2008 - 08:41
Originally posted by fines
I believe that was Rahal, though.
Anyway, it's a big shame that the Concorde Agreement virtually killed this and similar deals by not allowing an occasional third entry for a team, ... I do recall Jonathan Palmer in a third Williams,
And that was in 1983...and it's Bernie we are talking about. If he had wanted a third car, the would have found a way of getting one somehow.
#9
Posted 16 April 2008 - 10:26
#10
Posted 16 April 2008 - 11:16
#11
Posted 16 April 2008 - 11:28
Originally posted by Ross Stonefeld
A million in 1983 seems like an awful lot of money.
Ofcourse. Either it's a myth, or, if it's true, it's indicative of something unpleasant: that Ecclestone did not want Mears to drive for him.
#12
Posted 16 April 2008 - 11:30
Originally posted by Jerome
Ofcourse. Either it's a myth, or, if it's true, it's indicative of something unpleasant: that Ecclestone did not want Mears to drive for him.
Or Rebaque was paying even more.....
#13
Posted 16 April 2008 - 14:08
Lets speculate however, that Mears did get the Brabham spot.
What assurance would there have been that BE would have provided the best car for Mear's ? Looked at another way, BE could have set Mears up for failure by ensuring that his car was not top notch, therebye "proving" that US drivers are not worthy of F-1.
Mear's made the right decision.
Best,
Ross
#14
Posted 16 April 2008 - 14:30
Originally posted by rl1856
Maybe it is me (as an American GP fan), but I have long detected an anti-American bias from BE. His price of $1mm may have been his way of telling Mears, without saying so, that he would not get the drive.
Lets speculate however, that Mears did get the Brabham spot.
What assurance would there have been that BE would have provided the best car for Mear's ? Looked at another way, BE could have set Mears up for failure by ensuring that his car was not top notch, therebye "proving" that US drivers are not worthy of F-1.
Mear's made the right decision.
Best,
Ross
Bernie, as we know, is nobody's fool. If Mears had signed for the team and been as quick as(or quicker) than Nelson then I can't see Bernie doing anything other than back him to the hilt.
The potential sponsorship draw from the richest economy on earth, should one of their own be successful in F1, remains enormous. But, first you need to crack this 'successful' aspect !
I think Bernie's ambivalence towards America is something of a front ('not bovvered really') to cover the continued failure of F1 to make the best use of a top line American driver and reach the wider US public.
#15
Posted 16 April 2008 - 15:03
#16
Posted 16 April 2008 - 15:09
I believe F1 budgets in that time frame were in the the $2-$M US range if I remember correctly. A Rent-A-Ride was definitely $1M US. Yes, Hector had all of that Mexican oil money.
#17
Posted 16 April 2008 - 15:21
#18
Posted 16 April 2008 - 16:05
I guess Jerome is on the money here. If that story is true, then I'm sure Ecclestone had realised that Mears "didn't have it", and tried to tell him off in "a polite way". Bernie's too shrewd to let an opportunity like that pass, and frankly, I'm not so sure Mears had the ability and commitment to be successful in F1. Multiple Champion? Dream on...Originally posted by Jerome
Ofcourse. Either it's a myth, or, if it's true, it's indicative of something unpleasant: that Ecclestone did not want Mears to drive for him.
#19
Posted 16 April 2008 - 16:12
Is he really though? Sometimes Bernie let slip a long-term advantage to the benefit of the short-term. Viz the Brabham-Alfas - surely a Brabham-Cosworth would have been a title winning proposition in the mid to late 70s? McLaren won the title with a 4 year old car...Originally posted by fines
Bernie's too shrewd to let an opportunity like that pass...
This month's Motor Sport also mentions the point that Brabham were never flush with money, and they never won the Constructors' Title when Bernie was there. After all, you'd think that many drivers would have done a better job in 1981 than Rebaque. When Lauda retired he went for the less than impressive Zunino and other works Brabham drivers included von Opel, Robarts, Hesnault and Perkins, all of whom were not really top drawer and none of whom had looked outstanding in lower formulae. And the Fabi thing which was odd (legacy of Kyalami 1982?).
It is possible that he didn't want to take a risk. I have never seen official times from that test, but the rumour is consistent that Mears was faster than Piquet.
Advertisement
#20
Posted 16 April 2008 - 16:38
He was faster than Piquet at Riverside.
#21
Posted 16 April 2008 - 17:04
The additional fabric to fit his groin area may have been a prohibitive cost factor.
When qualifying for Indy he had the...uhhh..."determination" to place his left foot over his right foot to prevent an unintentional (though psychologically prudent) "feathering" of the accelerator when entering the turns at 200+mph.
#22
Posted 16 April 2008 - 17:13
#23
Posted 16 April 2008 - 17:35
Too risky, surely? Bernie knew he had one superstar. Question is why no-one else bothered...
#24
Posted 16 April 2008 - 18:21
Originally posted by David M. Kane
Ross:
I believe F1 budgets in that time frame were in the the $2-$M US range if I remember correctly. A Rent-A-Ride was definitely $1M US. Yes, Hector had all of that Mexican oil money.
No, I don't think that is correct. Frank Williams in 1982 had a budget of 15 - 20 million dollars, as far as I remember.
But if anyone wants to correct me, be my guest.
#25
Posted 16 April 2008 - 19:11
#26
Posted 16 April 2008 - 19:30
Or perhaps the Motor Sport article will cover it.
So did Rick not get the ride because Bernie wanted $1 million, or because Rick didn't want to give up his Slurpees?
Dave
Note to self: look in old Autoweeks.
#27
Posted 16 April 2008 - 19:37
#28
Posted 16 April 2008 - 19:44
That's what I meant by commitment - US drivers were traditionally loath to give up US Racing $$$ for a career (mainly) in Europe, from Parsons over Foyt to Little Al. Even Mario took ten years to understand that he couldn't have both at the same time, wrecking much of his status in the US in the process.Originally posted by Dave Ware
I also recall reading, at the time, that Rick wasn't too keen on racing outside of the U.S. Something about liking the familiar American landscape, being able to go to 7-Eleven (a U.S. convenience store) and such.
Bernie may have sensed a problem there, and tried to test Rick's commitment on the lines suggested by ensing14 earlier: "Bring me a million bucks now and collect later" Evidently then, he was right!
#29
Posted 16 April 2008 - 19:46
Possible! And Bernie didn't want F1 to become a Rick Mears one-man show, so to protect his long-term interests he made sure that Rick would never again ask!Originally posted by Dave Ware
Or maybe Rick and the full tanks and woodies and Nelson had the qualifiers... ;-)
#30
Posted 16 April 2008 - 20:21
Senna was miles off the Piquet pace in his 83 Brabham test.Originally posted by ensign14
Like he did with Senna?
#31
Posted 17 April 2008 - 00:13
Originally posted by doc540
And let's not overlook the considerable expense of fitting Mears into a driving suit.
The additional fabric to fit his groin area may have been a prohibitive cost factor.
When qualifying for Indy he had the...uhhh..."determination" to place his left foot over his right foot to prevent an unintentional (though psychologically prudent) "feathering" of the accelerator when entering the turns at 200+mph.
Yes, that's very true... Sometimes I think people "forget" what it took to do that back then. Well over 200 mph and no runoff at all...
Can you do it?
#32
Posted 17 April 2008 - 17:49
#33
Posted 17 April 2008 - 20:11
That's what I meant by commitment
I think I would call that "lack of interest." I think of commitment as the resolve to do something you have agreed to do. Mikey Andretti didn't have the commitment to F1 in '93. But Mears said that he didn't want to do it. In my mind that's a different thing.
If Mears had wanted to drive in F1, I have no doubt that the commitment and success would have been there.
#34
Posted 18 February 2009 - 15:29