Their number of GT wins can't be outdone next year, but their number of f ups can.
The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. 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!
Opportunity for a new Saudi team?With 20 riders to release, surely there is a 3rd party in the deal?
The best change would unequivocally be Jumbo folding.If this means that Roglic goes to, say, Bahrain and Remco goes to Ineos, that's not necessarily a bad thing for GTs. There will be a lot of handwringing if this happens but change is not always bad. As a pragmatic matter, SQS are treading water right now, and Jumbo is bailing as sponsor. So something has to happen.
If so, you'd water down the current Jumbo team.If this means that Roglic goes to, say, Bahrain and Remco goes to Ineos, that's not necessarily a bad thing for GTs. There will be a lot of handwringing if this happens but change is not always bad. As a pragmatic matter, SQS are treading water right now, and Jumbo is bailing as sponsor. So something has to happen.
Best for what?The best change would unequivocally be Jumbo folding.
Opportunity for a new Saudi team?
That doesn't explain UCI having a new team name registered for 2024 though (if Bruyneel is correct). You can't register a team name 2 years ahead of time and if it was a new team from scratch, surely they would have been better replacing Jumbo anyway as that's oven-baked winning team for a new sponsor?I think it's also possible to have a merger done for 2025 as Jumbo are committed next year? I think it's 38 riders combined under contract for 2025 and less pressing timeline to put everything in place.
Why? Do you really think Vingegaard just disappears?Best for what?
The Tour of the past two years would have been far worse off.
That doesn't explain UCI having a new team name registered for 2024 though (if Bruyneel is correct). You can't register a team name 2 years ahead of time and if it was a new team from scratch, surely they would have been better replacing Jumbo anyway as that's oven-baked winning team for a new sponsor?
That doesn't explain UCI having a new team name registered for 2024 though (if Bruyneel is correct). You can't register a team name 2 years ahead of time and if it was a new team from scratch, surely they would have been better replacing Jumbo anyway as that's oven-baked winning team for a new sponsor?
Why? Its two teams merging, its not Remco and Roglic merging. What the hell are you on about as per usual?Wouldn't it make more sense to post this in Rogla - Remco thread?
So Soudal Visma in theory could make sense. That is the withdrawal of Jumbo from sponsorship to be elegantly resolved. As for Soudal Visma keeping all the big guns. Here i am a bit sceptical.
We'll see.
Not only for fans.Life long QS fans in the mud right now.
There's only one solution to this.How is this possible, a team can have max 30 riders?
Well, maybe.The best change would unequivocally be Jumbo folding.
Expecting this means Roglic and Evenepoel leaving smacks of coping to me.
Need to have initial paperwork and finances by UCI's September deadline (extended to November if sponsor/paperwork issues). It makes sense what Bruyneel said that a new team was registered for next year because most-likely the Soudal & Jumbo licence will end as currently registered for 2024 and one will be sold off, one will become Soudal-Visma.What are the requirements for a team to be registered anyway? Because I am not sure what having a team name registered means (or does not mean.
I don't think he on his own made those two Tours great.Why? Do you really think Vingegaard just disappears?