Jayco al-'Ula and its GreenEdge predecessors

[Sydney21]

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

But he is already contracted with UHC for another year... maybe next year

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

Is Trent Lowe available or is he still sticking to his story about Garmin destroying his health?

What about that rider that was released from his contract earlier this year for unspecified reasons.

 

[gerrans for the win]

Is Trent Lowe available or is he still sticking to his story about Garmin destroying his health?

What about that rider that was released from his contract earlier this year for unspecified reasons.

is it that hard to read 3 post up????

 

[Damiano Machiavelli]

is it that hard to read 3 post up????

Ah, so I take it that Matt Loyd is the rider who was released from his contract. I could not remember his name.

Does Matt White make it pretty much impossible for Lowe to get a GE contract? It looks like Lowe really screwed himself.

 

[gerrans for the win]

lowe is rideing mountain bikes for fun that's about as close as he will get to racing again sadly, such a waste ...

an Matt Loydd rates himself way to highly (mick rogers syle), i have a feeling he might go to a french team that is mainly white

 

[Libertine Seguros]

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?

No, the team's ranking should be based on the points that the TEAM gained the previous year.

The bit about using the individual points was only for judging the merit of a team that starts from scratch, like GreenEdge are doing.

 

[auscyclefan94]

No, the team's ranking should be based on the points that the TEAM gained the previous year.

The bit about using the individual points was only for judging the merit of a team that starts from scratch, like GreenEdge are doing.

But the team could be comprised of many different riders and be a different team. Teams may be getting riders who have points and can get success so they can be apart of the WorldTour. It seems a little unfair that someone's points is going to a team they won't be with.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

But the team could be comprised of many different riders and be a different team. Teams may be getting riders who have points and can get success so they can be apart of the WorldTour. It seems a little unfair that someone's points is going to a team they won't be with.

Yes, but then it's unfair for a team to work all year to gain somebody points, then that person to leave and the team to be left without those points, because they sacrificed potential points scorers to support that person that's leaving.

In football, if a player who scored 25 goals in the season moves team, does he take the matches he won and the goals he scored with him? No. And so it should be with cycling. You leave the team that you gained all those points for? You knew what you were getting yourself into when you moved on.

It helps to protect teams against being given the shoulder in favour of a big money newcomer, and against their leader leaving. If a team's leader leaves they have to scramble hard to find a guy with comparable points to replace them - see Androni Giocattoli losing Scarponi last year.

 

[clipperton]

No, the team's ranking should be based on the points that the TEAM gained the previous year.

The bit about using the individual points was only for judging the merit of a team that starts from scratch, like GreenEdge are doing.

i'm even more confused now. you're saying that existing teams should keep the points that riders gain for them (regardless of whether the riders leave) but that new teams should be judged on the riders they can sign up?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

i'm even more confused now. you're saying that existing teams should keep the points that riders gain for them (regardless of whether the riders leave) but that new teams should be judged on the riders they can sign up?

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Teams will be granted licences at each of the 3 levels based on what the team did last year.

Obviously this does not apply to new teams, so their riders' points will be tallied up. If their riders have scored more points than the 41st-ranked TEAM they will be ProContinental, if not they will be Continental.

Under no circumstances should they be WorldTour.

 

[LukeSchmid]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Teams will be granted licences at each of the 3 levels based on what the team did last year.

Obviously this does not apply to new teams, so their riders' points will be tallied up. If their riders have scored more points than the 41st-ranked TEAM they will be ProContinental, if not they will be Continental.

Under no circumstances should they be WorldTour.

This seems like a good way of doing it. If, however, it is felt that new riders should be taken into account, perhaps a teams total could be the points it earned during the year plus 25% (or some similar relatively small amount) of the points of its new riders. That way for instance if a rider earns a 100 points then his old team gets 100 while his new team gets 25.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Yes, but then it's unfair for a team to work all year to gain somebody points, then that person to leave and the team to be left without those points, because they sacrificed potential points scorers to support that person that's leaving.

In football, if a player who scored 25 goals in the season moves team, does he take the matches he won and the goals he scored with him? No. And so it should be with cycling. You leave the team that you gained all those points for? You knew what you were getting yourself into when you moved on.

It helps to protect teams against being given the shoulder in favour of a big money newcomer, and against their leader leaving. If a team's leader leaves they have to scramble hard to find a guy with comparable points to replace them - see Androni Giocattoli losing Scarponi last year.

Yes but in Soccer, the only scoring option for you is the team. In cycling there are multiple scoring options so a team does not face relegation. Scarponi gave Androni a lot of coverage last year and a lot of results. Points wise it doesn't help them out but tough luck imo, it may be a bit unfair but it is better than your option.

 

[Green_&_Gold]

Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying.

Teams will be granted licences at each of the 3 levels based on what the team did last year.

Obviously this does not apply to new teams, so their riders' points will be tallied up. If their riders have scored more points than the 41st-ranked TEAM they will be ProContinental, if not they will be Continental.

Under no circumstances should they be WorldTour.

I understand what your saying 100% and i think that would be a great way of doint it. I see now that if a team worked hard all season for 1 rider in particular and they up and left, then that would really stuff you up. I hadnt realised that.

 

[Green_&_Gold]

I don't think the line up so far is that bad. There is an ok mix so far. All we need is a couple of big names, like Goss and Tony Martin (any chance??) and it would make for a good 1st season. I really rate Gerrans i think he will be a standout. I glad we havent got Lloyd WAY overrated but we should try and get Rory Sutherland.

 

[Gloin22]

Love the way you used 'we'

 

[Sydney21]

I don't think the line up so far is that bad. There is an ok mix so far. All we need is a couple of big names, like Goss and Tony Martin (any chance??) and it would make for a good 1st season. I really rate Gerrans i think he will be a standout. I glad we havent got Lloyd WAY overrated but we should try and get Rory Sutherland.

I think ive mentioned this before but Sutherland is contracted with UHC through next year.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Yes but in Soccer, the only scoring option for you is the team. In cycling there are multiple scoring options so a team does not face relegation. Scarponi gave Androni a lot of coverage last year and a lot of results. Points wise it doesn't help them out but tough luck imo, it may be a bit unfair but it is better than your option.

The current system is brilliant if you want to set up a new team, or have lots of money to throw at the table. If you don't, then you're liable to get swallowed up and spat out. I think that there's no problem with globalisation in the sport, but because it may well turn out to be unsustainable, the base should be protected a little.

A team should get the benefit from its hard work. The team make tactical decisions based around getting the best of their riders to the front, and if those best riders then up sticks, then all of their work was for nought.

If a rider moves to a team that's an ambitious, fast-improving ProContinental or Continental team (like when Evans went to BMC) or to a brand new startup team (like when Sastre went to Cervélo) they know what they're getting themselves into. If a footballer in the top league signs for a team in the second league, but with a good promotion prospects, he knows that if they don't get that promotion - which he can do nothing about as he's on another team at the time - he will be playing in the second league. If he was that keen on playing in the top league he would have signed for another top league team or stayed where he was. By signing for that team, he took a risk, just as Evans took a risk in signing for BMC and not knowing if they would get a Tour invite.

We shouldn't be penalising the teams that can't afford to keep the stars for not being able to afford to keep them, otherwise we're punishing them doubly - "you lose your top rider, and because that top rider's gone to a richer team you lose your top level licence, to guarantee you won't make enough money to get riders of that calibre again".

With Pat McQuaid's current hard-on for globalisation, a team like GreenEdge would get plenty of invitations to big races anyway. If their team is strong enough to be World Tour, they wouldn't need a World Tour licence to go, because they'd be invited anyway. And if their team isn't strong enough to be World Tour, they shouldn't - and wouldn't - get a licence anyway, so the point is moot.

 

[Andy99]

Love the way you used 'we'

Ha! Like annoying football fan talk

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Mark Beretta has tweeted the jersey for next year, retweeted by Mark Renshaw. It is rubbish.

 

[Gloin22]

Mark Beretta has tweeted the jersey for next year, retweeted by Mark Renshaw. It is rubbish.

Contender for the worst jersey ever in 2012 cycling peleton.

 

[Gloin22]

 

[NickBVK]

Oh dear, that is. The black seems irrelevant... replace it with fading green on one side and fading green on the other and may look ok.

At least the black will show off all the previous champions bands?

 

[PCutter]

I may have to withdraw my support.

 

[Boardslide]

My first though was Vaitkus too. What about Wurf... I know he was off contract at the end of this year but I doubted that he would leave Basso's side. Hopefully Der Panzerwagon

Vaitkus is now confirmed

 

[the_kman]

WTF is that

noone in their right mind would wear that s**t. goddammit ive waited for an aussie team for years and when we get one it has a lameass jersey and hasnt signed anyone awesome yet. seriously wtf.