Replacing Fred Vasseur may not solve Ferrari’s underlying problems, according to Jacques Villeneuve and Naomi Schiff, who believe the more important issue could lie higher within the Maranello organisation. Their assessment comes as fresh speculation surrounds the Ferrari team principal following renewed links between Christian Horner and the Scuderia.
Vasseur’s position has come under greater scrutiny after a difficult run of results. Ferrari briefly raised hopes of challenging Mercedes for the 2026 Drivers’ Championship following Lewis Hamilton’s victory in Barcelona and Charles Leclerc’s success in Britain, but the Italian team has since gone five races without a podium.
The disappointing sequence has inevitably returned attention to how Ferrari is managed, although both Hamilton and Leclerc have publicly supported their team principal. That driver backing is one reason Villeneuve believes Vasseur is currently in a different position from some of his predecessors.
Jacques Villeneuve says Fred Vasseur has valuable protection from Ferrari drivers
Speaking on Sky Sports F1, Jacques Villeneuve rejected the idea that Fred Vasseur should simply be viewed as a scapegoat. In his assessment, responsibility naturally comes with being at the top of a Formula 1 organisation: a team principal receives credit when results are strong and faces criticism when performance deteriorates.
Villeneuve added that the intensity surrounding Ferrari is particularly severe. Anyone joining the organisation, whether a team principal, driver or engineer, has to accept that strong performances can bring enormous praise while a short sequence of poor races can quickly turn public and media opinion against them.
Asked whether Vasseur deserved additional time, the 1997 world champion was less definitive. He noted that previous Ferrari team principals had not necessarily received the same patience, while suggesting that the major difference this time is the support Vasseur receives from his drivers.
Both Lewis Hamilton and Charles Leclerc defended the French manager ahead of the Bahrain Grand Prix in Malaysia. Leclerc has emphasised Vasseur’s importance in bringing people together and leading the organisation, while Hamilton has argued that criticism of Ferrari’s difficulties should be directed elsewhere.
Naomi Schiff and Jacques Villeneuve point towards Ferrari’s senior structure
Naomi Schiff broadly agreed with the argument that Ferrari’s difficulties cannot be reduced to the performance of one team principal. While acknowledging the prestige attached to leading the Scuderia, she also highlighted the exceptional pressure that accompanies the position.
Schiff pointed in particular to Hamilton’s support for Vasseur, noting that the seven-time world champion has been positive about the team principal’s willingness to listen and implement changes. Her assessment was that Ferrari may need to examine its organisational structure at a higher level rather than focusing exclusively on Vasseur.
That inevitably places attention on chairman John Elkann and CEO Benedetto Vigna, who sit above the Formula 1 team principal in Ferrari’s hierarchy. Questions around Ferrari’s senior leadership and the roles of John Elkann and Benedetto Vigna have already become increasingly prominent as results have fallen short of expectations.
Ferrari’s power structure compared with Toto Wolff at Mercedes
Villeneuve believes the difference in decision-making authority is especially important when comparing Vasseur’s position with that of Toto Wolff at Mercedes. The Austrian is not only team principal but also chief executive and a 28 per cent shareholder in the Mercedes Formula 1 operation.
According to Villeneuve, that structure gives Wolff a level of control that Vasseur simply does not possess at Maranello. He argued that the Ferrari team principal does not have complete authority over the organisation or all of its major decisions because senior figures remain above him.
The distinction is particularly relevant amid speculation surrounding Christian Horner. The former Red Bull team principal has indicated that he would be willing to forgo an ownership stake to join Ferrari, describing the opportunity at Maranello as his dream job. Reports have subsequently suggested that Ferrari could consider replacing Vasseur at the end of 2026, although the team has publicly maintained confidence in its current principal and stated that it is not looking to replace him before his contract expires in 2027.
Even if Christian Horner were eventually appointed, the underlying question over authority would remain. The suggestion is that John Elkann would be unlikely to surrender the level of control required to give a Ferrari team principal overriding power across the organisation.
Would replacing Fred Vasseur actually change Ferrari?
The debate therefore extends beyond whether Vasseur himself has performed well enough. Ferrari committed heavily to the new regulations after shifting substantial focus towards its 2026 Formula 1 project, yet the current campaign has still failed to develop into the sustained title challenge Maranello hoped for.
Ferrari has responded to the latest rumours with another public show of confidence in its team principal, and the backing of Hamilton and Leclerc strengthens Vasseur’s position. But Villeneuve and Schiff’s arguments raise a broader question: whether changing the individual at the head of the Formula 1 team would actually address a system in which the team principal does not hold ultimate authority.
For Vasseur, responsibility for results remains unavoidable. Yet if Ferrari’s difficulties are rooted partly in how power and decision-making are distributed above the team principal, replacing him alone would leave the fundamental structure unchanged.
Leave a Reply