<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RCV600RR @ Feb 26 2009, 04:48 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>And because he whooped serious arse in the AMA as a teenager.
Yes, and they didn't want to lose that talent to Yamaha. Honda offered him a satellite ride or a WSBK ride (can't remember which) for 2003 and Hayden declined and signed a letter of intent to ride for the factory Yamaha squad. Honda then decided they didn't want to lose Hayden so they signed him to the Repsol team.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RCV600RR @ Feb 26 2009, 04:48 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>It's difficult to make the argument that he wasn't a contender when he actually won a title(in fact, your point is somewhat contradictory).
He showed a lot of promise in 2003 but in 2004 he had a few injuries, a few falls and a few technical failures and only a few glimpses of that promise in 2003 shown through. Based on his 2004 season I think it would be very hard to consider him a contender. But, as I alluded to previously, him taking a win was not completely out of the question either.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RCV600RR @ Feb 26 2009, 04:48 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>How was it a gift? Sure, Edwards would have been a great choice too, but Hayden didn't land a factory Honda ride through luck. Choosing Hayden over Edwards was like a choice between a proven talent vs a promising prodigy. Ultimately, Nicky Hayden's world title proves that the Repsol ride wasn't a gift.
You go back to the end of the 2002 season, who deserves your now vacant factory GP ride? The 21 year-old prodigy who just won you a domestic SBK title or the 30 year-old who just won his second WSBK title and is arguably in the greatest form of his career?
Maybe gift is the wrong word, but Edwards had done quite a bit for Honda over the years and deserved more than what they offered. I'm a Nicky fan but I think Edwards should have gotten that ride.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (RCV600RR @ Feb 26 2009, 04:48 AM)
<{POST_SNAPBACK}><div class='quotemain'>Marco Melandri?!
The same Marco Melandri that was coming off back to back disappointing seasons at Yamaha? It makes sense for Honda to dump Hayden after taking 5th and 8th in the championship compared to Melandri's 15th and 11th? You can't make the Melandri argument until his next contract, which was after 2006, and by that time Hayden has already proved his worth at Honda.
Oops. I can't follow it either. What i was trying (badly) to say, is that their are reasons to hire a rider besides if they are a contender or not. Only a few riders on the grid are realistically contenders, and the rest still get jobs for one reason or another. Besides the first contract Nicky may well have been hired based on his potential to be a contender (whether he actually was or not is irrelevant), but he may have been hired for plenty of other reasons too. Better?
