The Cycling News forum is looking to add some volunteer moderators with Red Rick's recent retirement. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to
In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.
Thanks!
I have to say, this is the most reasonable way to look at this.A mid-season transfer this particular season strikes me as a terrible idea for whatever team ends up signing him.
But perhaps more importantly, if the dominant GT team in cycling is making it clear that they have better options than Froome, and are willing to let him go, then that suggests he is not going to be a serious contender for the Tour. They have to know that letting him go will give him further incentive to win and prove them wrong (and I think we could all agree that Froome has a serious commitment to winning already), so I think this should be read as Ineos deciding that Froome is not only surplus to their needs, he is not able to compete at a level where they need to be concerned about him as an adversary either.
Good observations. If he were to pull out a spectacular win, Ineos would have the money to re-sign him. If he isn't up to standards and poses a conflict with Bernal, GT and others they can determine which event he would appear and resolve the issue.I have to say, this is the most reasonable way to look at this.
If you sign Froome, you do it for one of two reasons, I would think. Either for publicity/marketing or to win a GT, which in this case would be the Tour. I don't think there are many businesses/enterprises who consider an event that, while it is more likely to happen than not, has a significant chance of not occurring as a good investment for their marketing. Plus, who has the money to do this right now? A few perhaps, but the options are much reduced in the initial stages of economic distress.
As far as hiring him to win a GT, you have to look at Froome as damaged goods. Literally, insofar as he had a major injury that may reduce what his peak-level performance may be. But perhaps more importantly, if the dominant GT team in cycling is making it clear that they have better options than Froome, and are willing to let him go, then that suggests he is not going to be a serious contender for the Tour. They have to know that letting him go will give him further incentive to win and prove them wrong (and I think we could all agree that Froome has a serious commitment to winning already), so I think this should be read as Ineos deciding that Froome is not only surplus to their needs, he is not able to compete at a level where they need to be concerned about him as an adversary either.
But Ineos has already built for the future. They've got Kwiatkowski and Dennis in the "still got some peak years left" category, Carapaz, Geogeghan Hart and Moscon in the "just coming into peak years" category, and Bernal, Sivakov, Sosa and Dunbar in the "building for the future" category, including some for the latter who are very much building for the present too. They've got a very pliant agent who has been giving them favourable treatment in the placement of supertalents to line his back pockets, and they've also got a good connection to Savio's production line of South American talents too.Possibly. Another way to look at it is Ineos believes they need to prioritize the future in Bernal and not risk losing the next decade plus of him in order to get 1-2 good years out of Froome. This could be analogous to the Tom Brady situation that just played out. The Patriots know they didn't have a better option that TB in the near future but they preferred to let him walk rather than rather than tie themselves to a new contract that would likely provide at least a year or two of elite performance but also at least a year or two of significant decline, which would hinder them from building the future.
I don't see it. Abarcá are not one of the highest budgets out there (actually somewhere in the midfield) and if they had the money for it, you bet they'd have done more to retain either Quintana or Landa instead given Telefonica's presence in South America and the home market of Spain. They might have accepted losing one, but they would have avoided having both walk and probably kept hold of some of the other experienced hands they lost this off-season if they had the kind of money left over to hire Chris freaking Froome. Spending above market value on reclamation projects and climbers who are past their prime may be an Unzué thing, but that's usually been for people at the Gadret, Moreau, Szmyd kind of level. Froome? Seems very unlikely. Not unless he's taking a humongous pay cut.Movistar? Telefonica isn't doing great but (who is) but they seem to be in it for the long term and they should be fine. Movistar sorely need a little luster. Obviously, it's not quite their usual route but I think they have to consider it, particularly if Mas and Soler don't step up big, fast. All the more so if Valverde retires.
Plus, Unzue seems like a level-headed enough guy, but even he might not be altogether unenthused at the chance for a little payback for Amador, Carapaz, etc. Sure, this may mostly be a ploy by Froome to try to get a little more commitment out of Brailsford. But I can see Movistar lending themselves to be a stalking horse.
And more, for the right price. If Froome values wins over money it might be a good move for him too. That team won the won Giro last year, and they were pretty much the only ones to take it to Sky at the Tour -and that was without any riders in the top five.
Also, I mean, if I ran O2 I would be pretty much begging HQ to take his salary out of my marketing budget.
Movistar? Telefonica isn't doing great but (who is) but they seem to be in it for the long term and they should be fine. Movistar sorely need a little luster. Obviously, it's not quite their usual route but I think they have to consider it, particularly if Mas and Soler don't step up big, fast. All the more so if Valverde retires.
Plus, Unzue seems like a level-headed enough guy, but even he might not be altogether unenthused at the chance for a little payback for Amador, Carapaz, etc. Sure, this may mostly be a ploy by Froome to try to get a little more commitment out of Brailsford. But I can see Movistar lending themselves to be a stalking horse.
And more, for the right price. If Froome values wins over money it might be a good move for him too. That team won the won Giro last year, and they were pretty much the only ones to take it to Sky at the Tour -and that was without any riders in the top five.
Also, I mean, if I ran O2 I would be pretty much begging HQ to take his salary out of my marketing budget.
You know way more about Movi than I do but my feeling was that what their stinginess over the winter was due more to personnel than to strategy. IIRC someone something said in the documentary implying that they had plenty of money to offer Carapaz but while they mulled it over he took Sky's cash. They've been steadily mid-table the last ten years or so but I'm thinking they must be drifting hard towards the bottom of it now. How much could they possibly be paying Mas? Or Soler, their likely third-highest paid rider? And Valverde is coming off the books soon. Maybe the purse-strings tightened but it seemed to me it was also that Unzue wasn't finding the riders he wanted at the prices he wanted. Chris Froome on the cheap? Particularly having O2 there on the sleeve already? I can see some special Tour uniforms in the offing, but what do I know. Just reading some tea leaves and putting it out there.I don't see it. Abarcá are not one of the highest budgets out there (actually somewhere in the midfield) and if they had the money for it, you bet they'd have done more to retain either Quintana or Landa instead given Telefonica's presence in South America and the home market of Spain. They might have accepted losing one, but they would have avoided having both walk and probably kept hold of some of the other experienced hands they lost this off-season if they had the kind of money left over to hire Chris freaking Froome. Spending above market value on reclamation projects and climbers who are past their prime may be an Unzué thing, but that's usually been for people at the Gadret, Moreau, Szmyd kind of level. Froome? Seems very unlikely. Not unless he's taking a humongous pay cut.
Koronin, the Tour is the biggest race in cycling, by far. It's actually bigger than the rest of cycling sponsorship-wise. And Unzue knows that as well as anyone. Last season they won the Giro and yet no one here seems to consider it a successful season for them. Now, no one on Movistar's roster is within range of having a shot at winning the Tour. Being on the podium a Giro or a Vuelta would make it a dream season for any of them. They would all more than settle for Giro or Vuelta leadership for now, including Valverde. Valverde doesn't seem to even want that, all he wants is a free ride and even still he has been willing to work for the teammates if necessary the last five years, including at the Vuelta. Chris Froome, on the other hand, is the greatest Grand Tour rider of the last ten years by quite some distance. He was on the heels of winning the Giro and podiuming the Tour back-to-back this time last year.
You know way more about Movi than I do but my feeling was that what their stinginess over the winter was due more to personnel than to strategy. IIRC someone something said in the documentary implying that they had plenty of money to offer Carapaz but while they mulled it over he took Sky's cash. They've been steadily mid-table the last ten years or so but I'm thinking they must be drifting hard towards the bottom of it now. How much could they possibly be paying Mas? Or Soler, their likely third-highest paid rider? And Valverde is coming off the books soon. Maybe the purse-strings tightened but it seemed to me it was also that Unzue wasn't finding the riders he wanted at the prices he wanted. Chris Froome on the cheap? Particularly having O2 there on the sleeve already? I can see some special Tour uniforms in the offing, but what do I know. Just reading some tea leaves and putting it out there.
Oh, come on. No, the Vuelta isn't close to as important as the Tour for them either. Movistar didn't come out of Nairo's Vuelta win thinking all was right with the world. "We saved the season", maybe. But they were aiming for the bigger prize.You are WRONG. For Movistar la Vuelta actually IS as important for them as the Tour and in many ways la Vuelta is more important. You forget they are a Spanish team with a Spanish sponsor. That holds a lot of weight when it comes to the importance of la Vuelta. Also there is no way of knowing what Enric Mas is or is not capable of doing in the Tour as he was with a team without GC support. He is know with a team that is putting their future in his hands and building a team around him. Also Froome is not an guarentee he would even be able to finish in the top 20 of any GT after the injury he had. By the way they DID have a successful season with their podium at la Vuelta. NO they would NOT settle for the Giro specifically or just la Vuelta. Movistar doesn't care much about the Giro, but they hold la Vuelta very high and even higher than the Tour in many ways. You have totally forgotten Froome hasn't raced in over a year now and had an injury NO ONE has come back from. Froome has shown MORE signs of decline than Valverde has. Sorry, Movistar not only would not sign Froome as they have no interest in him. They are not one of the teams that sign old GC riders. They may sign climbing domestiques who are older and past their prime, but not GC riders.
Carapaz signed with Ineos BEFORE Movistar could even negotiate with him. This is where the big problems between Movistar and the agent came from and they black listed that agent. Also if Froome has that agent Movistar won't even talk to him. Mas and Soler are likely being paid over 1 million euros each. Valverde has a 5 year contract, with racing through 2021, however he's been talking to them about adding another year to that and the team has already said he just needs to let them know when he decides he wants to add 2022 to his racing and fix the contract to show he'll be racing through 2022. He's signed with them through 2024.
Again, to explain this point. Movistar is betting the future on Enric Mas and Marc Soler. They are coming into their peak and they are building their team around these two riders they expect to become their leaders. They also have a very good atmosphere around the team this year. The very LAST thing they want or need to do is bring in someone that will cause problems and bringing in Froome would cause problems. They already have the riders they want on their team.
Are Barloworld reforming for him?I wonder who are the two teams that are interested in a mid-season transfer?
Chris Froome in discussions over a mid-season transfer
Four-time Tour de France champion weighing up his options away from Team Ineoswww.cyclingnews.com
Oh, come on. No, the Vuelta isn't close to as important as the Tour for them either. Movistar didn't come out of Nairo's Vuelta win thinking all was right with the world. "We saved the season", maybe. But they were aiming for the bigger prize.
Also, wake up and smell the coffee. What is Unzue going to say, "Sorry guys, we're going to blow chunks all over this season?" Of course, they're hoping Soler and Mas do well. They're building for the future. But their chances this year aren't all that great and they know it. And I think I rate them more than most.
Unzue's last Tour was a quarter-century ago. He knows how much they're worth, and that chances to win them are few and far between. He's seen older riders than Froome come back from worse and maintain their level higher. And he's seen how good Mas was on the Iseran. So has everyone else. There's a reason why Froome odds are so short and Mas's odds are so very long and it's not because bookies love losing money.
Anyway, it's just a punt. Pure transfer speculation. Maybe they have and plan and they're sticking to it. Maybe they just don't have the pesetas and the pounds aren't quite chuffed enough to spell them. But maybe not.
So by that logic last successful season for them was 2006, right? And before that 1995?. Last season they won the Giro and yet no one here seems to consider it a successful season for them.
He's seen older riders than Froome come back from worse and maintain their level higher.
"Cobertura" here means "(phone) coverage". He's saying he would have good coverage in Spain, which is a wink wink nudge nudge reference to Movistar, a telecommunications company.P.S. Rojas wrote that in Spain he'd eat very well and would have good [presumably team] support. Froome liked the tweet. "The man comes, the man goes, without [rhyme or] reason. The man comes, the man goes..."