[Green Edge] Shayne Bannan, Gerry Ryan and an Aussie Pro Team for 2012?

Page 32 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
AussieGoddess said:
to be honest, while I would like them to get a name rider .... I am ok with what they are doing.

Building a team is about more than just buying in a ready-made group. They dont have to be super successful in their first year. We are now getting used to the Sky/Leopard Trek kind of thing where we expect a new team to be immediately the best. But we shouldnt. New teams with a long term outlook SHOULD be looking at developing over time.
But in that case, perhaps they would be better off doing that developing as a ProContinental team? After all, did we really need to see that much more of the "developing" BMC team in 2010? Or Footon?

If you're going to be given a golden ticket straight to the top level, we should expect a new team to be immediately able to compete at that top level, and if they aren't, then there are teams outside of that top 18 who have as much talent, and much more history, who are being passed over in favour of giving GreenEdge an easy ride to the top. That's what the issue with them not being so strong is.

Of course, they may announce some names that are pretty strong now and make us eat crow, and then they may well deserve that ProTeam licence. I still come down favouring all new teams - including the likes of Sky and Leopard - having to spend a year ProContinental to prove their worth before being given a World Tour licence.

If they want to develop and build up to being a top team, then that's absolutely great - long term commitment and all. But if it's only a work in progress, they shouldn't be given priority over established teams, until that work is nearing completion.
 
Libertine Seguros said:
But in that case, perhaps they would be better off doing that developing as a ProContinental team? After all, did we really need to see that much more of the "developing" BMC team in 2010? Or Footon?

If you're going to be given a golden ticket straight to the top level, we should expect a new team to be immediately able to compete at that top level, and if they aren't, then there are teams outside of that top 18 who have as much talent, and much more history, who are being passed over in favour of giving GreenEdge an easy ride to the top. That's what the issue with them not being so strong is.

Of course, they may announce some names that are pretty strong now and make us eat crow, and then they may well deserve that ProTeam licence. I still come down favouring all new teams - including the likes of Sky and Leopard - having to spend a year ProContinental to prove their worth before being given a World Tour licence.

If they want to develop and build up to being a top team, then that's absolutely great - long term commitment and all. But if it's only a work in progress, they shouldn't be given priority over established teams, until that work is nearing completion.
Totally agree - and I have already said I think they should be Pro-conti to start with.
 
Jun 16, 2009
19,657
0
0
So you would have a team like Leopard Trek who would easily be good enough to be ProTour team in their first team be a Pro Continental Team which would not ensure them places in all the big races?
 
Apr 9, 2011
3,034
1
0
auscyclefan94 said:
So you would have a team like Leopard Trek who would easily be good enough to be ProTour team in their first team be a Pro Continental Team which would not ensure them places in all the big races?
But they would have been invited to any race they wanted.:p

I agree with pro-conti 1 year
 
Aug 26, 2010
364
0
0
just some guy said:
But they would have been invited to any race they wanted.:p

I agree with pro-conti 1 year
In theory it would be great to develop as a pro conti team. But I don't think they would have got Goss and a number of other of their riders if they werent at least aiming at being assured a start in the giro and the tour. I think they could have probably got into the classics regardless.
 
Yeah they would've got into some of the classics. The way this squad is shaping up I don't think it's a foregone conclusion that they would be invited to more than one of the GTs.

Leopard probably had too many big riders to be a ProConti team, but I certainly agree that most new teams should be ProConti for their first year.
 
auscyclefan94 said:
So you would have a team like Leopard Trek who would easily be good enough to be ProTour team in their first team be a Pro Continental Team which would not ensure them places in all the big races?
Yes. Remember that Cervélo were ProConti in 2009, and went to every race they damn well pleased. BMC were ProConti in 2010, and they got to go to almost any race they pleased, because Ballan, Evans and Hincapie were pretty good carrots to wave.

Leopard Trek could easily have got by as ProContinental, because what race organiser in their right mind would turn down Cancellara and the Schlecks?
 
Jul 7, 2010
395
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Yes. Remember that Cervélo were ProConti in 2009, and went to every race they damn well pleased. BMC were ProConti in 2010, and they got to go to almost any race they pleased, because Ballan, Evans and Hincapie were pretty good carrots to wave.
But it meant ruining Cadel's season by racing him in the Giro chasing points for ProTour the following year.

Point is, if the roster is so weak, why will it end up in ~14th or so position on this years points.

They won't be the best team in the world, but they'll be as good as the lower ProTour teams, and will get some results.

Goss will sign (probably already has), it'll be announced on September 1 when he is allowed.

Everyone keeps talking about it being a sprinters team, but look at the officially announced 13 and none really stand out as a sprinter! Sure Goss will be, Cooke used to be, and there is a few trackies there (who aren't sprinters), but it's not really full of them like some people seem to imply.

I hope Howard joins too, so they have a good sprinter for the second tier races, and Goss for the main ones.

I think they have a decent team for the classics to be honest, O'Grady, Cooke, Goss, Langeveld, Gerrans and Clarke. Plus quite a few guys who are more than capable of doing some hard work. I don't see what the panic is about.
Leopard Trek could easily have got by as ProContinental, because what race organiser in their right mind would turn down Cancellara and the Schlecks?
But GreenEDGE won't have those sorts of draw cards, so needs the points first season. To be a successful Australian professional team, it needs to race the big races first up. Another continental team will end the same as they all have.

What will be interesting is whether GreenEDGE will get there. They'll have more points than a few of the ProTour teams, but I'm not sure they'll have more points than many that are due for license again in 2011 - Katusha and Saxo Bank, plus whatever becomes of Lotto/Quickstep.
 
abbaskip said:
But it meant ruining Cadel's season by racing him in the Giro chasing points for ProTour the following year.
Was Cadel's 2010 really that bad? The only difference is that he raced the Giro and would have been too tired for the Tour, otherwise he'd have had May off and done the Tour as normal. And he still would have crashed and got injured, and we wouldn't have had him playing his role in the best GT in recent memory either.

Point is, if the roster is so weak, why will it end up in ~14th or so position on this years points.

They won't be the best team in the world, but they'll be as good as the lower ProTour teams, and will get some results.
Because the points system is crazy. And the idea of "they'll be at the standard of the lower ProTour teams" as a legitimate justification for them to have a licence ahead of teams with comparable rosters but more history is a bit weak to me. And besides, like I said, I favour ALL new teams proving themselves as wildcards, rather than being ushered to the top at the expense of people who've been supporting the sport for years. I can understand why they might want to usher a team with a squad as strong as Leopard to the top - but for a squad of the strength that GreenEdge looks like having it feels like they would be better served being able to pick their fights where they can compete and really add something to races, rather than being forced to spread their meagre holdings over all the biggest races. Will they really justify their presence at a race like País Vasco more than Euskaltel justify theirs at Roubaix?

Goss will sign (probably already has), it'll be announced on September 1 when he is allowed.

Everyone keeps talking about it being a sprinters team, but look at the officially announced 13 and none really stand out as a sprinter! Sure Goss will be, Cooke used to be, and there is a few trackies there (who aren't sprinters), but it's not really full of them like some people seem to imply.

I hope Howard joins too, so they have a good sprinter for the second tier races, and Goss for the main ones.

I think they have a decent team for the classics to be honest, O'Grady, Cooke, Goss, Langeveld, Gerrans and Clarke. Plus quite a few guys who are more than capable of doing some hard work. I don't see what the panic is about.
But GreenEDGE won't have those sorts of draw cards, so needs the points first season. To be a successful Australian professional team, it needs to race the big races first up. Another continental team will end the same as they all have.
There is a big difference between a Continental team and a ProContinental team. Just having Goss should get them to any sprinters' race and any and all Classics. They can probably sweet-talk their way into the Tour and at least one of the other 2 GTs. And what's more, having that kind of calendar, they'll probably be able to be more competitive than if they're doing every race.

What will be interesting is whether GreenEDGE will get there. They'll have more points than a few of the ProTour teams, but I'm not sure they'll have more points than many that are due for license again in 2011 - Katusha and Saxo Bank, plus whatever becomes of Lotto/Quickstep.
Saxo's roster looks like being pretty weak, but Contador will probably pull them out of the mire. GreenEdge are both causes of, and victims of, the shelving of riders for the points.

Personally, I believe that the points should go to the TEAM you race for, not the rider. After all, if you sign for a team that wasn't WorldTour last year, you know what you're getting yourself into. You chose to leave a top level team to gamble on a new team. A new team's relative merit should be judged on the points that their present roster has, and that should come into play for wildcard discussions, and there should be fewer WorldTour teams (15). At the end of the season, the top 15 ranked teams are WT, the next 25 ProConti, all others Continental. Any new teams will be ProConti if the sum of their roster's individual points come to more than the 40th-ranked team.
 
Jul 26, 2011
452
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
for a squad of the strength that GreenEdge looks like having it feels like they would be better served being able to pick their fights where they can compete and really add something to races, rather than being forced to spread their meagre holdings over all the biggest races. Will they really justify their presence at a race like País Vasco more than Euskaltel justify theirs at Roubaix?
Has there been a discussion here about whether it would be a good idea for WT teams to be able to bow out of a very limited number of races every year?

It would suck for their domestiques though, missing out on opportunitities to ride for themselves. And classics riders maybe not doing any GT in a year.
 
Yea, I think if they're going to persist with a full 18 WT teams, which I feel to be too inflexible for race organisers, then they should certainly give teams the opportunity to back out of a couple of races, like when Euskaltel and FDJ handed their Giro invites back last year.
 
This whole debate is just making me think how nonsensical it is to force all 18 teams to go to all these races.

The organisers have enough about them to invite the big names, but it is stupid to have teams forced to go to events where they don't want to be/will have no impact.
 
May 23, 2011
977
0
0
Boys, boys, boys, I know there were not many good riders available and GE's roster is looking a bit crap. There is a solution. Leipheimer is without contract.
 
Feb 16, 2011
1,457
0
0
The latest issue of RIDE cycling revue, an aussie mag, states that Matt Lloyd won't be signing for GreenEdge. Any idea why he isn't wanted, or is it a case of the rider not wanting to join the team?

Personality, clinic issues?

So far, it doesn't look like they have anyone who can climb a bit.
 
Jun 1, 2011
11
0
0
Green Edge have gotta sign Rory Sutherland, no ifs and no buts. The guy is on fire this year and Europe would be a natural progression for him
 
Apr 14, 2010
727
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
If you're going to be given a golden ticket straight to the top level, we should expect a new team to be immediately able to compete at that top level, and if they aren't, then there are teams outside of that top 18 who have as much talent, and much more history, who are being passed over in favour of giving GreenEdge an easy ride to the top.
Ignoring the idea of PC for all new teams first, which of the teams outside the top 18 do you think are those with as much talent on their roster as GE?

Skil looks like it is improving its roster with its German sprint double, but its debatable they would have a better/equal roster (and Im a fan of their two Germans) - if it gets Martin, then yes, PT, Europcar probably struggled last year to go PT because of their late sponsor find (probably would swap AG2R out for them), neither Cofidis nor FDJ's roster matches up in my opinion (their best riders are probably Rein and Pinot/Roy respectively - good but hardly the biggest talents in the peloton), Geox is pretty dependent on Menchov and not much else for the rest of the year - Cobo/Duarte had some good rides, the Italian PC teams have some riders who will own a stage or two of the Giro, but not really threaten the win, and in reality probably don't have the funding to actually compete in PT all year. I'd argue GE's classics squad is better than the Belgian PC teams.

Its actually a serious inquiry, not taking the pi$$
 
Stingray34 said:
The latest issue of RIDE cycling revue, an aussie mag, states that Matt Lloyd won't be signing for GreenEdge. Any idea why he isn't wanted, or is it a case of the rider not wanting to join the team?
Reading it as well. No idea why, maybe he just wants to go to a team which he can target something rather than juts make up numbers in a GT.

Would be a perfect fit to go to BMC now as Cadel said his team will now be required to do the pace-setting for next years TDF.

Geox will definitely have as much talent as GE. Just depends on how they apply themselves. FDJ have Fedrigo for next year and also Offredo. I would also love for AG2R to be swapped out for Europcar and any of their good riders going to Europcar.
 
PCutter said:
Ignoring the idea of PC for all new teams first, which of the teams outside the top 18 do you think are those with as much talent on their roster as GE?
Geox, Androni Giocattoli, Europcar (even taking their freakishly good Tour out of the equation Titi V has been incredible this year). Would say Farnese Vini but they're going to lose Visconti. If they sign Pellizotti and Rebellin as rumoured then them.
 
Sep 27, 2009
1,008
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Geox, Androni Giocattoli, Europcar (even taking their freakishly good Tour out of the equation Titi V has been incredible this year). Would say Farnese Vini but they're going to lose Visconti. If they sign Pellizotti and Rebellin as rumoured then them.
FDJ are not a bad team either with Casar, Fedrigo, Hutarovich, Roux, Roy, Ofreddo and young climbers Jeanneson and Pinot. Even Guesdon at 39 was very good in Paris- Roubaix finishing 11th,

Ag2r have a strong climbing squad with Gadret, Peraud, Dupont, Roche, Riblon and others. With Gadret's 4th in the Giro and Peraud's 10th in the Tour de France I think it would be a pity if they were dropped down a level.
 
Jan 7, 2010
121
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Personally, I believe that the points should go to the TEAM you race for, not the rider......Any new teams will be ProConti if the sum of their roster's individual points come to more than the 40th-ranked team.
are you not contradicting yourself here? saying that points should go to the team but that the team's ranking sohuld be based on the points of the individual? not trolling, just confused.

the other consequence of making teams do a season as pro-conti first up that i can see is that it would make teams regard their protour status with a bit more value. still, wouldn't the way around this simply be for the money behind any given team to just buy out an existing protour team?
 
Aug 26, 2010
364
0
0
Libertine Seguros said:
Geox, Androni Giocattoli, Europcar (even taking their freakishly good Tour out of the equation Titi V has been incredible this year). Would say Farnese Vini but they're going to lose Visconti. If they sign Pellizotti and Rebellin as rumoured then them.
Those teams have one or two riders better then GE. they are not even close to being as good a team... but ofcourse it is had to compare 'climbing teams' with a classics and sprinters team.

Also news about Lloyd is a pity. I was hoping that he would have another shot at KOM in the Giro and even in the Tour too.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY