Originally Posted by Master50
I am trying to figure out if you are trying to support my argument. Well you have show Pat is qualified and Greg has related experience.
No, running a sports organization is not like running a business, the goals are not aligned and while I will acknowledge Greg may be a businessman and even a good one he is not experienced in sports governance. Greg isn't even eligible at this point as he would need to be elected as a candidate put forth from USA cycling. Even if McQuaid quit today Greg is not going to be the guy in any short order. Do you think that there might be someone else at USA cycling who is already eligible to be an American candidate for president?
Sure the UCI could be replaced with another organization that would be indistinguishable from the one in place once they are finished with the IOC and the one hundred and some federations who also have to cede their power to the new organization. Maybe the pros could get out but no one who ever wanted to race in an olympic sport. For non pros the only amateur route is through carding out of the federation. Most government support goes only to athletes in olympic sports. Do you know that Downhill MTB riders and Cyclocross racers get no federal funding but all the olympic cycling disciplines do. So all the amateurs in your breakaway Sport will lose any government funding as will facilities and coaches. Might work for the US but in Canada the sport would collapse overnight.
Now none of this prevents Mr Lemond from pursuing a UCI presidency or from being the president of any new cycling organization but don't expect that the people who would elect him might not have other ideas about who should run? If USA Cycling wanted to make a run at the UCI presidency whom do you think they would back? I don't see Greg at the top of the list and I wouldn't put it past a board member or 2 that would want Lance over Greg but that is only speculation.
I do like Greg and I think he is a man of great integrity but This is a job for a politician and Greg is too blunt. (Did I really just type that?)
Yup I reread it. Politics need skill at politics and the job is political. Just like I would not be a good politician I certainly have not seen much skill in that regard from Greg. He is too blunt.
Yeah I know be the change you want and I do wish for honestly from our politicians but bad politicians cause a lot of problems when they don't know how to get the population to look forward to the trip. Even honest ones need it too.
Please note that I do not think it would be best for the UCI or for Greg for him to take over as an interim head. Such a move, however, would be completely consistent with Corporate, Government, and Not-for-profit practice.
Thus, it is fully defensible and rational even if my opinion does not support it.
With respect to the biggest divergence from a 'business' and an organization like the UCI, the UCI is a not-for-profit. Not-for-profits differ from for profit enterprises in their accounting practices and tax treatment. Fortunately, the UCI has both an accounting staff as well as consultants and auditors. This would not be an issue for Greg.
Moreover, being a not for profit does not mean that the UCI cannot pursue lucrative opportunities. And, just like a business, this may be the preferable approach.
If we compare Pat when he first took the helm to Greg now, Pat did have three years of hands-on experience operating a (small) NSO, where Greg had many more years of experience as an athlete in the Pro Peloton and as a supplier to Pro and neo-Pro teams. Greg was the first cyclist to get major contracts and sponsorships.
Greg definitely knows the business world of high performance cycling.
It is important to keep in mind that neither Greg nor Pat have to do all of the jobs that are within the UCI organization. They don't even need to know what they all are, or who does them.
As with the accounting staff, it is also critical to keep in mind that the UCI is fully staffed.
With respect to the actual job, the three key roles of ALL 'CEO's are as follows:
1. Establish the organization's strategy
2. Function as the primary communicator to all stakeholders and the outside world
3. Make sure the enterprise is funded
It is a short, but very challenging list. Evaluate any CEO against it.
It is also a list that Greg, as interim head, could almost certainly do a credible job of.
Again, these observations are not intended to defend and not even supporting Greg, but simply stating fact. I believe that Greg is more than capable of performing as interim head, even if I would like to see a different outcome (e.g. no interim head, and a long-term replacement for Pat at the earliest opportunity).