Why.
The schumacher 'era' was magnificient, but it did not make Ferrari as magical as is being portrayed. And as if in the pre- and pro- Schumacher there were no championships. Hell, with Schumacher, there were 5 seasons where they did not get the championship and 6 where they did get the WCC.
Let's present some facts instead of Ferrari bashing.
Ferrari Constructor championships ;
2008, 2007, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1999, 1983, 1982, 1979, 1977, 1976, 1975, 1964, 1961
16 Constructors championships of which 6 with Schumacher. the 1999-2004 era was 'rare' at most,
just as RedBull was 'rare' to have a WCC streak like they had. They 'earned' it but it's not suddenly
canon to only be accepted if you're on a killing spree.
2007 and 2008 saw Ferrari win without schumacher the constructor's championship.
Was Ferrari a disgrace in 1965 to 1975? Ten years without constructors? No, they weren't a disgrace.
So how bad did Ferrari really do recently?
2014; 4th currently in the championship standings with still the potential to become 3rd
2013; 3rd
2012; 2nd
2011; 3rd
2010; 3rd
2009; 4th
1996, 1997, 1998; 2nd > like in 2012
1991, 1994, 1995; 3rd > like in 2010, 2011, 2013
Ferrari's worst results up to date were in 1981 (5th, 1980
10TH!, 1973, 1969, and more.
Meanwhile Ferrari had a World Driver Champion thanks to their car in the seasons 2007, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, 2000, 1979, 1977, 1975 and some more.
So how bad really is Ferrari doing this year? If they maintain their position, just as good/bad as in 2009. And if they grab the 3rd position in the WCC, they were just as good/bad as in '13, '11, '10, '05. Do we concider these years bad?
Extreme negativity here. A new F1 format and Ferrari doesn't perform like we'd might want to see and it's a madhouse in here. 2009 was exactly the same.
Ferrari has won many championships without schumi without the schumi approach. The schumi approach worked, good.
Non-schumi approaches worked, too. Good.
