New Womens Teams for 2012

[Anonymous]

Going to be an interesting season.

Two brand new teams

Rabobank putting out a full womens team
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/rabobank-presents-its-2012-teams

Nicole Cooke and Rochelle Gilmore heading a new Honda team
http://www.sbs.com.au/cyclingcentral/video/2168900152/rochelle-gilmore-interview

The Jayco/AIS team moving up to world level as the Greenedge Team
http://www.theage.com.au/sport/cycling/greenedge-to-break-new-ground-with-women-20111207-1oj6f.html


HTC Womens team surviving in the form of Team Specialized
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/team-specialized-lululemon-resurrects-high-road-womens-team

Obviously counteracted by the potential loss of the Garmin team.

All we need now is decent tv coverage

 

[Catwhoorg]

I'd still like to see Sky putting out a womens team.

 

[Anonymous]

I'd still like to see Sky putting out a womens team.

Not sure I would. Where they got their riders from could damage a lot of other teams that have worked hard over the years.

Yes, the top girls are at top end trade teams, garmin (Lizzie, Emma Pooley), htc, etc, but its the mid level girls currently riding at 100%ME/GB Academy (Laura Trott etc ), theres a fair few at Horizon fitness (Dani King, Joanna Rowsell etc). Im not sure how much damage a womens SKy team would do to the other teams that have been working hard for years. Personally i would rather see Sky divert extra cash into either the academy team or enter a joint sponsorship deal with someone like Horizon to help them make it up to the next level.

That said, Sky's media power would obviously do good things for womens cycling.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Sky should either have gone in from the get-go, or wait until next year (after the Olympics, meaning a long-term contribution, since a lot of trouble was caused by the Halfords project being abandoned as 'mission accomplished' pretty much as soon as Cooke crossed the line in Beijing).

The main hubs for women's cycling are the Netherlands and Italy, and it's nice to see another new team in BePink (signing Noemi Cantele as their biggest name). I'm definitely disappointed in the scaling back of Diadora-Pasta Zara, though they did perform somewhat disappointingly in 2011 given the quality of some of the riders they have; they do have the problem however that the lack of races and race sponsorship means there are precious few races which throw the advantage towards riders like Claudia Häusler and Mara Abbott, even despite them winning 2 of the last 3 Giri.

I'm in two minds over whether the Fundación Euskadi should combine their teams too - there are 3 (4 if you count Tolosa) Basque women's teams (the rosters aren't all Basque, of course, unlike their male equivalent). If they combined then you might be able to see them be more competitive on the world scale, but it would also pretty much kill off all women's cycling in Spain bar the Valencia round of the World Cup (maybe even that) and the Emakumeen Bira.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

I think all protour teams should be encouraged / obliged to have a women's team. It should be a point of shame that the two biggest teams budget-wise (Sky and BMC) don't field a women's team.

A few suggestions (I suspect none of them are that novel and have probably been floated before, but here goes):

- points awarded by the UCI which count towards [pro/world]tour status for the next round of licence applications include both men's and women's results (perhaps on a differential scale to start with if that is too controversial).

- alternatively, any team fielding a full-time (and salaried) women's team earns a bonus fixed number of points for the season.

- it is a condition for any worldtour or high-tier race that the race also fields a women's race earlier in the day or the day before. Those races with less bargaining clout that need the status for their credibility (eg. TDU / Beijing etc) could easily be forced to take this on.

- TV coverage rights are awarded for races on the condition that the package also covers snippets / highlights of the women's race (perhaps while we are all sitting there watching the men's race when there's still 3 hours to go before the finish...). I understand this may be difficult since it is the race organiser that probably holds the TV coverage rights rather than the UCI or the national governing body but perhaps thwe governing body could also make it a condition of the status allocation?

 

[daveinzambia]

I think all protour teams should be encouraged / obliged to have a women's team. It should be a point of shame that the two biggest teams budget-wise (Sky and BMC) don't field a women's team.

A few suggestions (I suspect none of them are that novel and have probably been floated before, but here goes):

- points awarded by the UCI which count towards [pro/world]tour status for the next round of licence applications include both men's and women's results (perhaps on a differential scale to start with if that is too controversial).

- alternatively, any team fielding a full-time (and salaried) women's team earns a bonus fixed number of points for the season.

- it is a condition for any worldtour or high-tier race that the race also fields a women's race earlier in the day or the day before. Those races with less bargaining clout that need the status for their credibility (eg. TDU / Beijing etc) could easily be forced to take this on.

- TV coverage rights are awarded for races on the condition that the package also covers snippets / highlights of the women's race (perhaps while we are all sitting there watching the men's race when there's still 3 hours to go before the finish...). I understand this may be difficult since it is the race organiser that probably holds the TV coverage rights rather than the UCI or the national governing body but perhaps thwe governing body could also make it a condition of the status allocation?

Sorry to be controversial but why should teams field a women's team. why should your place in the world tour be dependant on results from a women's race, why should sponsors be forced to sponsor a women's team if they do not want to.

personally i do think think forcing teams to do stuff is the right answer. the right answer to ensure you have a product that sponsors, teams and fans WANT to be involved in.

increase TV coverage, increase the number of top level exciting races and the sponsorship will follow.

Teams are not forced to have u23 teams and are not forced to have amateur teams so why a women's team?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

how do you ensure you have a product that sponsors, teams and fans want to be involved in, when you don't have the money to put on events that make the best of the terrain, and there aren't enough riders being paid enough to make a decent enough living to ride to a high enough standard to provide that product?

Increasing the TV coverage is all well and good, but we need it to be presented in the same way, otherwise it will look amateurish and insignificant by comparison and the interest will die off quickly. Demanding an increase in TV exposure is fine, but we need the people broadcasting it to care in order for it to come across well. Races like the Volta a Portugal continue to shrink, but the TV makes it feel important; other races may be important, but lack of interest from the TV companies means the coverage makes it seem less important (eg Catalunya). Increasing the number of top level exciting races is difficult to do without an injection of money that will enable them to use a better parcours. Some of the UCI's rules on stage length and stage race length could do with relaxing too, to create a more challenging, rewarding and entertaining calendar. Stage races are disappointingly lacking, and this is where leaning on race organisers is probably needed. We've lost a lot of key stage races in recent years, to the point where only really the Giro, Emakumeen Bira, Trentino, Thüringen, Toscana and the Netherlands survive. There are plenty of one-day races (and Gent-Wevelgem is adding a further one, happily), but the lack of stage racing (which is harder to link to a coterminous men's race) is the real obstacle.

 

[Tricky Dicky]

Dave, I'd prefer it if they weren't forced to but I think a step change is needed.

I suppose this might boil down to an argument over whether you just leave the sport to "the market" (sponsors / race organisers / TV companies) or whether you accept that the "governing bodies" should have some wider purpose (eg. encouraging the other 50% of the population to get more involved in a sport).

U23 teams / amateur teams [almost] look after themselves as people aspire to move up through the ranks to the top pro [male] teams. They compete in lower grade races, with lower costs of infrastructure, lower budgets etc to make them - kind of - viable. It is then up to the top pro teams to decide whether to wholly or partially fund them (mostly, to identify and recruit talent before those individuals hit the wider market).

The women's situation is dire. They have no real hierarchy to work their way up. I'd say that the UCI has really been leaving it to the "market" until now, and that's not worked.

From a marketing perspective, I think sometimes you have to "create" demand by putting a product out there that people didn't realise they wanted and it is only then that the "market" momentum takes over, sponsors voluntarily come on board etc etc. Keynesian economics if you like.

I fully accept that my ideas aren't perfect - some of it does seem rough on a sponsor who has finite $$ but, if the situation was all left to the sponsor, it may go down the path of only sponsoring individuals rather than teams: Evans, Schlecks, Cavendish etc (the "Tiger Wood" type of sponsorship) leaving the rest of the peloton to fend for themselves or rely on the benevolence of those stars. Remember that the UCI sees fit to impose a minimum wage for male pros - would that survive if it was just left to market forces?

To go back to my first philosophical point, I think governing bodies should have a wider role in promoting a sport and they should use levers available to them to encourage it. Making teams allocate some of their budget to a women's team just seems to me to be the right thing to do to get the total product (male and female pro racing) to grow.

Gerard Vroomen has some good debate on this on his blog but I accept there are no easy answers!

 

[daveinzambia]

My next question would be has the model of encouraging teams to start a women's team (encourage rather than force) been applied to any other sport? if so was it successful?

 

[Tricky Dicky]

You got me there - dunno for sure, but I think surfing (through the AFP) has done some things that cycling could learn from about cross-subsidy and co-promotion (where sponsors and TV need to cover both men and women's events) has led to a significant increase in interest in, and financial viability of, the women's side of the sport. I appreciate it is an individual sport and so isn't directly comparable though.

 

[BroDeal]

My next question would be has the model of encouraging teams to start a women's team (encourage rather than force) been applied to any other sport? if so was it successful?

It did not work that great for basketball.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=140JNDZogDc

 

[just some guy]

Re the whole mens world tour teams having womens teams - I ve been saying that for a while now - I think it is a must.

Re BMC I don´t get why they do not have a womens team - BMC want to promote their bike brand, 50 % of the population are women, I ve no idea of the % of women compared to men who ride but you would think that it would be a good think to have a womens team.

Rhis does seems to be doing other tings to help cycling though so maybe he does not have the budget at the moment.

 

[Anonymous]

Confirmed that Jayco-AIS will continue to run as a development team with Greenedge-AIS as the pro team. glad i was wrong.

 

[Anonymous]

My next question would be has the model of encouraging teams to start a women's team (encourage rather than force) been applied to any other sport? if so was it successful?

it works to an extent in football, but with the exception of Arsenal Ladies it tends to be the smaller clubs that put more effort and resources into their ladies teams. Arsenal dominated for years, but other succesful clubs included Doncaster Belles, Charlton, Everton, Leeds, Barnet, clubs outside the big top clubs in britain.

 

[Arnout]

I'm not gonna engage in any discussion about woman cycling anymore

 

[theyoungest]

I'm not gonna engage in any discussion about woman cycling anymore

Fascinating.