Teams & Riders Chris Froome Discussion Thread.

[will-10]

I almost never come to this thread as I lost interest years ago. With 7 Grand Tour victories I just don’t get why Chris Froome didn’t retire years ago? It is now 5 years since his Dauphine crash and he is 39 now. I also can’t see how he needs the money. By persisting he is only further sullying his reputation.

More is always more. These 4-5 years on various training camps for millions a year will probably mean he'll never need to work again

Also everytime Taxus posts yet another troll post I'm convinced people will finally catch on but somehow someone still bites everytime, I love it

 

[Izzyeviel]

I almost never come to this thread as I lost interest years ago. With 7 Grand Tour victories I just don’t get why Chris Froome didn’t retire years ago? It is now 5 years since his Dauphine crash and he is 39 now. I also can’t see how he needs the money. By persisting he is only further sullying his reputation.

Idea for TV show: '25 million reasons why'

He's getting five million a year to spend all day riding up & down mountains. We do it for free.

 

[veganrob]

I almost never come to this thread as I lost interest years ago. With 7 Grand Tour victories I just don’t get why Chris Froome didn’t retire years ago? It is now 5 years since his Dauphine crash and he is 39 now. I also can’t see how he needs the money. By persisting he is only further sullying his reputation.

Michelle might have more money then him even

 

[Rob5091]

Froome loves obviously bike riding and so long someone pays him to do it, he'll carry on. To be honest, it's no worse then certain riders getting their lesser talented brothers spots on teams.

 

[Extinction]

The problem for Froome now is that, in having carryied on for this long, he has only demonstrated his true level and this is how he shall be remembered to anybody who understands anything about the sport, not as a 7 GT winner. But a fraud.

 

[pastronef]

The problem for Froome now is that, in having carryied on for this long, he has only demonstrated his true level and this is how he shall be remembered to anybody who understands anything about the sport, not as a 7 GT winner. But a fraud.

when you just ride with 1 leg and a half after a huge crash it's hard to be on the top again. ask Beloki.
he "shall" be remembered as a rider who did beat Contador, Quintana, Dumoulin etc.

 

[Extinction]

when you just ride with 1 leg and a half after a huge crash it's hard to be on the top again. ask Beloki.
he "shall" be remembered as a rider who did beat Contador, Quintana, Dumoulin etc.

Except he's not riding with one leg, but two.

 

[Wyndbrook]

The problem for Froome now is that, in having carryied on for this long, he has only demonstrated his true level and this is how he shall be remembered to anybody who understands anything about the sport, not as a 7 GT winner. But a fraud.

Not sure I agree who will remember him as a fraud, perhaps a small few who post on cycling forums, to the mainstream media and the wider public he will always remain the guy who won the tour.

 

[Extinction]

Not sure I agree who will remember him as a fraud, perhaps a small few who post on cycling forums, to the mainstream media and the wider public he will always remain the guy who won the tour.

Which says much about the perception of the "wider public".

 

[Rackham]

Not sure I agree who will remember him as a fraud, perhaps a small few who post on cycling forums, to the mainstream media and the wider public he will always remain the guy who won the tour.

I think the real mainstream no longer cares about bike champions the moment they're no longer... champions. Just look at Bradley Wiggins & his descent into hell. No one cares. It's the sad, brutal truth of "sport as an entertainment".

Unless they become pundits on TV, popular podcasters or managers within the sport (whatever sport that is), former sports stars are worth about as much as washed up old actors. Which is very little.

The greatest indignity Froome now faces (& will face for the rest of his life) will be his quasi-anonymity. For example everyone laughed at that funny situation a few years ago where the French authorities stopped him on the road & turned him back because there was a risk of forest fires ahead (https://www.journaldesfemmes.fr/peo...oome-tour-de-france-incendies-jt-13h-france2/), i.e. with the joke being the fact the French news reported "Personne ne passe, pas même ce randonneur à vélo..."

Aka a cyclo-tourist, i.e. despite being a man who won the Tour 4 times, no one recognized who he was. He was just some bloke on a bike.

That's basically Froome's future.

 

[Krzysztof_O]

I think the real mainstream no longer cares about bike champions the moment they're no longer... champions. Just look at Bradley Wiggins & his descent into hell. No one cares. It's the sad, brutal truth of "sport as an entertainment".

Unless they become pundits on TV, popular podcasters or managers within the sport (whatever sport that is), former sports stars are worth about as much as washed up old actors. Which is very little.

The greatest indignity Froome now faces (& will face for the rest of his life) will be his quasi-anonymity. For example everyone laughed at that funny situation a few years ago where the French authorities stopped him on the road & turned him back because there was a risk of forest fires ahead (https://www.journaldesfemmes.fr/peo...oome-tour-de-france-incendies-jt-13h-france2/), i.e. with the joke being the fact the French news reported "Personne ne passe, pas même ce randonneur à vélo..."

Aka a cyclo-tourist, i.e. despite being a man who won the Tour 4 times, no one recognized who he was. He was just some bloke on a bike.

That's basically Froome's future.

Maybe Chris will become an actor, he looks at ease in commercials. All it takes is someone from the industry spotting his immense talent...

 

[Izzyeviel]

Froome is happy & set for life as long as he doesn't follow a certain someones steps in life.

The only person its acceptable to be mad at is the person who gave him the mega bucks contract in the first place. If an idiot gives you free money, you take it.

 

[Extinction]

I think the real mainstream no longer cares about bike champions the moment they're no longer... champions. Just look at Bradley Wiggins & his descent into hell. No one cares. It's the sad, brutal truth of "sport as an entertainment".

Unless they become pundits on TV, popular podcasters or managers within the sport (whatever sport that is), former sports stars are worth about as much as washed up old actors. Which is very little.

The greatest indignity Froome now faces (& will face for the rest of his life) will be his quasi-anonymity. For example everyone laughed at that funny situation a few years ago where the French authorities stopped him on the road & turned him back because there was a risk of forest fires ahead (https://www.journaldesfemmes.fr/peo...oome-tour-de-france-incendies-jt-13h-france2/), i.e. with the joke being the fact the French news reported "Personne ne passe, pas même ce randonneur à vélo..."

Aka a cyclo-tourist, i.e. despite being a man who won the Tour 4 times, no one recognized who he was. He was just some bloke on a bike.

That's basically Froome's future.

Although this could also be the case of an aged Bernard Hinault. A few years ago in Italy there was a rental car commercial during the Giro, in which an old Hinault struggling up an Alpine pass gets passed by some young riders who do not recognize him and make some snide remarks. Hinault shaking his fist as they drop him yells: "Show me your palmares"! When he arrives at the top of the pass his daughter and a friend are waiting to convince him to get in the car. Hinault refuses of course, saying he faught his whole life and has no intention of ending the ride before it's conclusion. Apart from the moving sentimentalism, the sad truth is that as athletes age they are destined to a certain anonymity. The difference between Bernard and Chris, however, is that the former will be called for interviews and celebrations of his legacy for as long as he lives, whereas the latter will sportwise literally fade into oblivion.

 

[movingtarget]

Although this could also be the case of an aged Bernard Hinault. A few years ago in Italy there was a rental car commercial during the Giro, in which an old Hinault struggling up an Alpine pass gets passed by some young riders who do not recognize him and make some snide remarks. Hinault shaking his fist as they drop him yells: "Show me your palmares"! When he arrives at the top of the pass his daughter and a friend are waiting to convince him to get in the car. Hinault refuses of course, saying he faught his whole life and has no intention of ending the ride before it's conclusion. Apart from the moving sentimentalism, the sad truth is that as athletes age they are destined to a certain anonymity. The difference between Bernard and Chris, however, is that the former will be called for interviews and celebrations of his legacy for as long as he lives, whereas the latter will sportwise literally fade into oblivion.

Oblivion for a six time grand tour winner is unlikely especially in the UK. Maybe a Cobo or Hesjedal or Horner might be long forgotten but I don't think Froome will be. But a lot of fans probably don't know he is still racing.............

 

[red_flanders]

Not sure I agree who will remember him as a fraud, perhaps a small few who post on cycling forums, to the mainstream media and the wider public he will always remain the guy who won the tour.

For fans vested in his success and for those (the media) who have no incentive to be transparent about the sport, yes. He will remain the guy who won 4 Tours. No question.

To observers who aren't Froome fans who need him to be a hero, and/or who have paid close attention to his career and the public statements made by him and his teams, he will not be remembered well. IMO.

I personally don't buy at all that he's still suffering from the injuries. He himself said he was back to 100% a year afterward. Fair to say nothing he says can be taken without a massive grain of salt, so who knows. That said, the explanation most consistent with what we see playing out is that he cashed in with the contract, and decided he was in no way willing to continue risking the above legacy with the media and his fans. So he tools around Europe being well paid at about his pre-transformation level.

I will certainly concede that this is not a common view. But I also don't consider "a small few who post on cycling forums" to be pejorative (not sure if you meant it that way, but folks often do). It's often if not always where the correct view about rider form and background have lived.

 

[Extinction]

Oblivion for a six time grand tour winner is unlikely especially in the UK. Maybe a Cobo or Hesjedal or Horner might be long forgotten but I don't think Froome will be. But a lot of fans probably don't know he is still racing.............

You don't necessarily have to go out on top, but, after his legal problems, to prolong the agony of his career like this probably means he won't be of any interest after he retires. I call that sporting oblivion.

 

[Hugh Januss]

For fans vested in his success and for those (the media) who have no incentive to be transparent about the sport, yes. He will remain the guy who won 4 Tours. No question.

To observers who aren't Froome fans who need him to be a hero, and/or who have paid close attention to his career and the public statements made by him and his teams, he will not be remembered well. IMO.

I personally don't buy at all that he's still suffering from the injuries. He himself said he was back to 100% a year afterward. Fair to say nothing he says can be taken without a massive grain of salt, so who knows. That said, the explanation most consistent with what we see playing out is that he cashed in with the contract, and decided he was in no way willing to continue risking the above legacy with the media and his fans. So he tools around Europe being well paid at about his pre-transformation level.

I will certainly concede that this is not a common view. But I also don't consider "a small few who post on cycling forums" to be pejorative (not sure if you meant it that way, but folks often do). It's often if not always where the correct view about rider form and background have lived.

Outside of the obvious clinic angle I really don't understand Froome's motivation. Either he's totally delusional or so manipulative that he's willing to donkey it up while spewing endless bs about the progress of his "comeback" and stealing money from his team. None of this is legacy building.

 

[Extinction]

Outside of the obvious clinic angle I really don't understand Froome's motivation. Either he's totally delusional or so manipulative that he's willing to donkey it up while spewing endless bs about the progress of his "comeback" and stealing money from his team. None of this is legacy building.

It's pure cynicism combined with mocking schadenfreude towards his teammates and employer.

 

[red_flanders]

Outside of the obvious clinic angle I really don't understand Froome's motivation.

There isn't any.

 

[Monte Serra]

Oblivion for a six time grand tour winner is unlikely especially in the UK. Maybe a Cobo or Hesjedal or Horner might be long forgotten but I don't think Froome will be. But a lot of fans probably don't know he is still racing.............

I'm not based in the UK, but I don't get the impression that Froome still has a large public presence over there. He doesn't regularly appear in talkshows or podcasts. The contrast with someone like Geraint Thomas is striking, who seems to be well prepared to continue his career in broadcasting.

 

[Lequack]

Chris weighs in on Sepp Kuss replacement

https://twitter.com/x/status/1805584555543269675

View: https://twitter.com/chrisfroome/status/1805584555543269675

 

[Taxus4a]

For fans vested in his success and for those (the media) who have no incentive to be transparent about the sport, yes. He will remain the guy who won 4 Tours. No question.

To observers who aren't Froome fans who need him to be a hero, and/or who have paid close attention to his career and the public statements made by him and his teams, he will not be remembered well. IMO.

I personally don't buy at all that he's still suffering from the injuries. He himself said he was back to 100% a year afterward. Fair to say nothing he says can be taken without a massive grain of salt, so who knows. That said, the explanation most consistent with what we see playing out is that he cashed in with the contract, and decided he was in no way willing to continue risking the above legacy with the media and his fans. So he tools around Europe being well paid at about his pre-transformation level.

I will certainly concede that this is not a common view. But I also don't consider "a small few who post on cycling forums" to be pejorative (not sure if you meant it that way, but folks often do). It's often if not always where the correct view about rider form and background have lived.

I dont like lot of things of Froome, but I will fight with all my strenth againt that becouse is fakse and it is a big mistake. It is the previous era wich is false. Froome was maybe not a supertalent, vey good rider for 3 week races with hot, but not so talented as other big names in History, but he won, and he won with the rules ok, not as his previous era who was very different. Lot opf people beileve you know a lot about cycling by sayin g things like that but it is not true. He did a very good first Tour when he was not to ride it..and he was quite bad later and even his team wanst thinking to sign him again before his good Vuelta. He got his place just becouse his merit, the team was with Wiggo. The route started at Alicente, a hot place...he find his level, it was a period, but he always got good result tre precious years, Good and bad result, but he gort always good result...every rider has a development and an stry behind....Pogacar has one, simnilar to Pinot..Evenepoel has another, and Froome has another...Ypour cannot say one is more logical without study all factors.

 

[will-10]

I'm not based in the UK, but I don't get the impression that Froome still has a large public presence over there. He doesn't regularly appear in talkshows or podcasts. The contrast with someone like Geraint Thomas is striking, who seems to be well prepared to continue his career in broadcasting.

why would he, he is literally never in the UK. he was even pretty irrelevant in the UK when he was winning his Tours

 

[Armchair Cyclist]

I'm not based in the UK, but I don't get the impression that Froome still has a large public presence over there. He doesn't regularly appear in talkshows or podcasts. The contrast with someone like Geraint Thomas is striking, who seems to be well prepared to continue his career in broadcasting.

Never did have: I don't recall him ever being in any mainstream advertising campaign, facial recognition outside the small group of those who follow cycling would be very low.

Froome was my wife's maiden name, and we need to spell it out more often than not when giving it, never heard "Ah, like the cyclist": she has never once been asked "Any relation...?"

He could probably make the case that he has been under-recognised in the honours system, although there is a reluctance to give those, I think, to non-residents (circumventing media complains about tax exiles?)

Calm, measured and polite doesn't really chime with the great british public.

 

[RedheadDane]

Froome was my wife's maiden name, and we need to spell it out more often than not when giving it, never heard "Ah, like the cyclist": she has never once been asked "Any relation...?"

So... any relation?