I help run a small amateur team in Texas and we plant our flag on our culture. It's immovable and we will not change it for anyone. To be honest it's immune to budget and everything else. It's simply all about the people/riders. Thanks for writing.
I think given you don’t mention Froome that there’s a strong argument that the Sky/Ineos heyday was gone over 10 years ago. Thomas’ TdF win was great to see but not a win for the ages and other than that we are looking at Bernal. Pidock is a generational talent but not a GC talent and there’s a stronger argument that they needed to pivot from GC to classics/shorter stage races rather than trying to revisit the past. Sky had its moment but it finished when Froome and Bernal crashed and they’ve failed to adapt, that i would agree with. Their disinterest in u23 and women’s teams (despite their public statements) made their PR about improving cycling seem hollow and Brailsford’s return hasn’t changed that.
Interesting take. I do see Thomas' win as one for the ages, IMO it was more impactful than any of Froome's wins - however, that is also my bias as a G.Thomas fan. I think we can both agree that Sky got their money worth, and Ineos very much have not.
I don’t think you can separate GT from the collapse though in honesty. Seems like a thoroughly nice guy and a great bike racer but you could argue that he won with relatively poor competition (Froome on the wrong end of a 3 grand tour streak). You can only win against people you race against but After that he ate a lot of their salary budget (as did Froome and Bernal I’m sure) so it can’t have helped. To be both unkind and perhaps a little kind, Thomas stood out as a more “real” winner than Wiggins or Froome to a lot of people; more relatable and believable. That said, his long term legacy is also a little diminished due to the team’s inability to be honest irrespective of how hard earned it was. Fundamentally my real belief is that irrespective of whether the team doors or not, in the minds of many there’s the asterisk next to the wins and that also has severely damaged the teams image and legacy.
National chauvinism is one of the biggest fetters on pro cycling IMO. Teams that prioritize recruiting based on national identity are not optimizing, they are lazy and advancing prejudice.
The best team now is UAE which is also probably the most international, though even they have their token Emirati to please their patron.
The sport will advance when the sole consideration is choosing the best riders based on team needs and goals
Interesting take and one that I partially agree with. I think UAE is a poor counterargument, as that's simply the biggest budget wins the race, rather than the most international team. However, EF are a good example when we look to international success.
Another good example could / should include Lidl-Trek, although if I'm not mistaken, the US-owned bike manufacturer has now sold off some of its ownership of the team to the former. So that may be a 'wait and see what lies ahead' kind-of-scenario. Plus Geoghegan Hart seems to have found his place there, despite a string of bad luck injuries after his 2020 Giro win (ironically as the Ineos bus was sliding into the ditch).
I think you pretty much have it right. The Froome and Bernal injuries ended the Sky dominance and while they kept trying to buy the best GC riders (Richard Carapaz post Giro win for example), it never really panned out. But for my money Ineos destroyed the culture as they clearly don’t care about the sport beyond the publicity it brings them. Same story at Man. United who are a relic now. The most interesting thing about them is how distraught Gary Neville can get after each drubbing.
To think Ineos had arguably the two best mountain bikers on the planet in Pidders and PFP, didn’t promote that aspect of cycling at all, and didn’t use them as a spark to create a devo or women’s teams is case closed. Hell Pidcock came directly from a development team in Trinity - they could have just partnered (or bought) them. That said the current squad is at least more interesting as opportunistic attackers than as a Borg collective. And Joe is right those TdF kits were fugly
I understand in a pure business sense that MTB doesn’t sell the same way as road not least because of the lack of a grand tour, classics etc. The women’s team or a dev team was needed though.
MTB doesn’t generate the same TV or streaming ratings as road but there are at least as many passionate riders if not more and that is an audience. PFP and Pidcock are obviously great road riders as well just illustrating they had two world class talents and failed to leverage them to make a better team. Counterpoint is EF whose most popular rider (Lachlan Morton) is usually on his own in the middle of the night.
I help run a small amateur team in Texas and we plant our flag on our culture. It's immovable and we will not change it for anyone. To be honest it's immune to budget and everything else. It's simply all about the people/riders. Thanks for writing.
Nice call out of Defector's TDF coverage — alongside EC's. Both sites had a good team in the ground this year.
I think given you don’t mention Froome that there’s a strong argument that the Sky/Ineos heyday was gone over 10 years ago. Thomas’ TdF win was great to see but not a win for the ages and other than that we are looking at Bernal. Pidock is a generational talent but not a GC talent and there’s a stronger argument that they needed to pivot from GC to classics/shorter stage races rather than trying to revisit the past. Sky had its moment but it finished when Froome and Bernal crashed and they’ve failed to adapt, that i would agree with. Their disinterest in u23 and women’s teams (despite their public statements) made their PR about improving cycling seem hollow and Brailsford’s return hasn’t changed that.
Interesting take. I do see Thomas' win as one for the ages, IMO it was more impactful than any of Froome's wins - however, that is also my bias as a G.Thomas fan. I think we can both agree that Sky got their money worth, and Ineos very much have not.
I don’t think you can separate GT from the collapse though in honesty. Seems like a thoroughly nice guy and a great bike racer but you could argue that he won with relatively poor competition (Froome on the wrong end of a 3 grand tour streak). You can only win against people you race against but After that he ate a lot of their salary budget (as did Froome and Bernal I’m sure) so it can’t have helped. To be both unkind and perhaps a little kind, Thomas stood out as a more “real” winner than Wiggins or Froome to a lot of people; more relatable and believable. That said, his long term legacy is also a little diminished due to the team’s inability to be honest irrespective of how hard earned it was. Fundamentally my real belief is that irrespective of whether the team doors or not, in the minds of many there’s the asterisk next to the wins and that also has severely damaged the teams image and legacy.
Doped, not “doors”. Sorry, missed the autocorrect
National chauvinism is one of the biggest fetters on pro cycling IMO. Teams that prioritize recruiting based on national identity are not optimizing, they are lazy and advancing prejudice.
The best team now is UAE which is also probably the most international, though even they have their token Emirati to please their patron.
The sport will advance when the sole consideration is choosing the best riders based on team needs and goals
Interesting take and one that I partially agree with. I think UAE is a poor counterargument, as that's simply the biggest budget wins the race, rather than the most international team. However, EF are a good example when we look to international success.
Another good example could / should include Lidl-Trek, although if I'm not mistaken, the US-owned bike manufacturer has now sold off some of its ownership of the team to the former. So that may be a 'wait and see what lies ahead' kind-of-scenario. Plus Geoghegan Hart seems to have found his place there, despite a string of bad luck injuries after his 2020 Giro win (ironically as the Ineos bus was sliding into the ditch).
I think you pretty much have it right. The Froome and Bernal injuries ended the Sky dominance and while they kept trying to buy the best GC riders (Richard Carapaz post Giro win for example), it never really panned out. But for my money Ineos destroyed the culture as they clearly don’t care about the sport beyond the publicity it brings them. Same story at Man. United who are a relic now. The most interesting thing about them is how distraught Gary Neville can get after each drubbing.
To think Ineos had arguably the two best mountain bikers on the planet in Pidders and PFP, didn’t promote that aspect of cycling at all, and didn’t use them as a spark to create a devo or women’s teams is case closed. Hell Pidcock came directly from a development team in Trinity - they could have just partnered (or bought) them. That said the current squad is at least more interesting as opportunistic attackers than as a Borg collective. And Joe is right those TdF kits were fugly
It baffles me how they didn’t go more in on MTBing!!
I understand in a pure business sense that MTB doesn’t sell the same way as road not least because of the lack of a grand tour, classics etc. The women’s team or a dev team was needed though.
MTB doesn’t generate the same TV or streaming ratings as road but there are at least as many passionate riders if not more and that is an audience. PFP and Pidcock are obviously great road riders as well just illustrating they had two world class talents and failed to leverage them to make a better team. Counterpoint is EF whose most popular rider (Lachlan Morton) is usually on his own in the middle of the night.