Team Ineos (Formerly the Sky thread)

[JimmyFingers]

So, you are of the opinion Brad had a chrystal ball that projected Chris Froome, Mick Rogers, Richie Porte and the Russian bloke were coming to Sky while he had on Garmin let us see:
* Chris VandeVelde
* David Millar
* Tom Danielson
* Ryder Hesjedal
* Dave Z.
And a lot of young guns coming up, like Dan Martin.

And, do note, Porte/Rogers/Froome and Sivtzov were certainly not of that calibre before joining Sky.

So yes, Brad lied big time on his motives to go to SKY. Or, should we say 'bend the truth'? If that suits you better I will change that Jimmy. For me it is lying.

And, do note too: Brad was at Garmin but was training with British Cycling [Rod Ellingworth], lost all that weight with the help of British Cycling [Nigel whats his name], under supervision of super Dave? I do not believe in coincidences given the history of cycling.

I just this is a red herring, the relative GT potential of Sky v Garmin. Sky were extremely ambitious, came into the sport saying they wanted to win the Tour, would have presented that ambition to Brad when they 'tapped him up', would have offered him plenty of cash to sign, and the opportunity to be a British leader of a British team.

I'm sorry that he didn't spell out all his motives exactly for you in a media soundbite which you are choosing to make such a fuss off but it's an irrelevance frankly. It was an obvious and natural choice for him to go to Sky. Natural for the team and natural for the rider. He certainly left behind a good organisation but I don't think it warrants this negative, nefarious spin you are attempting to put on it.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Fearless - You need to get out a bit more. Wiggo went for the money, but it's considered poor form in the UK to say such things. So a non-monetary reason has to be provided. But everyone - except a few diehards here! - knows he went for the money.

So we agree Brad has a way of bending truths?

Everybody knows he went for the money, just trying to get to the bending truth nature of Wiggins. When do we know he actually IS telling the truth?

To the bold: here in Holland we would not do that

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

Everybody knows he went for the money, just trying to get to the bending truth nature of Wiggins.

In this case, there's most likely an element of telling the audience what they want to hear.

i) The public don't like their sports stars to be overtly motivated by money, even though they're fascinated by the amounts involved. Hence, the size of his contract was clearly disclosed during the media events at the time of his signing

ii) As a new employee of Sky, he's hardly likely to say "The old team was better actually, it's just that Sky are paying me twice my market rate" is he? That would not go down well up the food chain at News International, who are providing funding to be the best. They don't want to be told by their new, over-priced, signing that they're not that good! (At least not in public.)

Wiggo does have a curious relationship with accurate and consistent detail. I'd believe him if he was under oath in court and when he's swearing.

 

[JimmyFingers]

So we agree Brad has a way of bending truths?

Everybody knows he went for the money, just trying to get to the bending truth nature of Wiggins. When do we know he actually IS telling the truth?

To the bold: here in Holland we would not do that

Every time a football player sign for a club he says he came here to win things, because the of the club's history, that he's always dreamed of playing for this club, that he loves the stadium or the fans, or the city, or that he wants to play with x player and work with x manager, he never goes 'it's because they're offering me £100,000 a week'. It's standard press conference soundbite fodder. And it isn't lies, all those things are factors in the decision.

Also Wiggins has won a GT with Sky, so where is the lie in saying he signed for Sky to win GTs, he's just won one!

 

[Spencer the Half Wit]

Every time a football player sign for a club he says he came here to win things, because the of the club's history, that he's always dreamed of playing for this club, that he loves the stadium or the fans, or the city, or that he wants to play with x player and work with x manager, he never goes 'it's because they're offering me £100,000 a week'. It's standard press conference soundbite fodder. And it isn't lies, all those things are factors in the decision.

Also Wiggins has won a GT with Sky, so where is the lie in saying he signed for Sky to win GTs, he's just won one!

Newcastle United have just signed 5 French players. Do you think they came to the North East for its Parisian like cafe culture, the walks along Riviera like prom in Whitley Bay, the vineyards of the Tyne Valley or because we tripled their wages?

99% of sportsmen follow the money. 99% of them don't admit it in public.

End of.

 

[The Hitch]

Fearless - You need to get out a bit more. Wiggo went for the money, but it's considered poor form in the UK to say such things. So a non-monetary reason has to be provided. But everyone - except a few diehards here! - knows he went for the money.

Id agree. Had wiggins not said that garmin are like wigan and sky man utd. Putting garmin down like that seems to me to go past telling the media what they want to hear.

 

[Caruut]

Newcastle United have just signed 5 French players. Do you think they came to the North East for its Parisian like cafe culture, the walks along Riviera like prom in Whitley Bay, the vineyards of the Tyne Valley or because we tripled their wages?

99% of sportsmen follow the money. 99% of them don't admit it in public.

End of.

Apparently one of the reasons Newcastle have had such success signing French players is that they treat them very well - wining and dining - when they come over for talks.

Your point still stands - most sportspeople are just following the money. Didn't Wiggins say in that interview with Kimmage upthread that Garmin were offering him the same deal, though?

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

Also Wiggins has won a GT with Sky, so where is the lie in saying he signed for Sky to win GTs, he's just won one!

Yes, he did, just not at the clean team, it was not possible there, what brings me back to the departure of Roger Palfreeman a few months within Wiggins signing for Sky.

No one has an explanation why he left BC and Sky. Time for Kimmage cum suis to get to the root of that imho.

Jimmy, stop comparing football with cycling, ever seen a cycling team with a debt of half a billion Euro's? That is trully a case of apples et oranges. With the budget team Sky has they wouldn't be in the top ten here in Holland soccerwise, in cycling they are the big guns...

And, cyclists do have a different moral, to some degree that is. They do not have to deal with a somehow imbecile fanbase like football teams have to, imagine Wayne Rooney going to his boyhood dream club Liverpool...

In cycling we do not have that problem.

Id agree. Had wiggins not said that garmin are like wigan and sky man utd. Putting garmin down like that seems to me to go past telling the media what they want to hear.

Thanks, forgot all about that.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

It's putting as negative as possible spin on any situation involving Brailsford/Wiggins/Sky. In politics it would be called a smear campaign, in the media character assassination.You're trying to convict Sky of doping, so you create a story of dubious morality to make that picture more compelling. It still remains an irrelevance, and calling what Wiggins said to explain his decision to sign for Sky a 'lie' is a massive stretch anyway.

Robin Van Persie said he couldn't imagine playing for anyone than Arsenal, that winning anything with another club wouldn't be the same, then 12 months later he signed for Manchester United. It's life, it's the world, and moral indignation over an employee breaking a contract and moving between employers (and where one was handsomely compensated) and linking that to doping is a huge over-statement.

Who is trying to convict Sky of doping?

Careful with stretching things when you are countering someone who accurately points out inconsistencies in the Sky story as a smear.

This is simple- Garmin were a better set up GT team than Sky in 2010, when the interview was given. No smear, its a statement of fact. The discussion then evolves to a "ah yes, but Sky could afford to buy a GT team" - thing is, Sky did not do that.

When Brailsford made his "winning a Tour with a British rider within 5 years" I remember thinking it was a lofty ambition, which is good. But looking at the then (2009) current British riders it was difficult to see anyone fitting that role, with the possible exception of Keannaugh.

 

[RownhamHill]

Yes, he did, just not at the clean team, it was not possible there, what brings me back to the departure of Roger Palfreeman a few months within Wiggins signing for Sky.

No one has an explanation why he left BC and Sky. Time for Kimmage cum suis to get to the root of that imho.

It's funny, because you're obviously quite anti-Sky, and the Palfreeman departure - as I seem to remember - has been explained in some detail. When they were setting up the team in 2009, Sky were talking about having a doctor to do a cutting edge internal dope testing etc - the cleanest team ever. But then they changed their minds, and decided to rely on the standard BP/WADA testing. No programme: no need for the Dr running the programme.

I'm pretty sure this has been a matter of public record since 2010 (I think I read about in 'Skys the limit' - that book about Sky - some of the story at least, it's been a while). And in terms of the 'dots' that have been joined in this thread, it's probably one of the few that isn't actually a delusional smudge (launch with a big PR blitz about internal testing, then can it – definitely heard about that somewhere else the previous year).

But instead of some interesting conversation about this, you ignore what is being said, and make out like it's some unknown mystery. It isn't.

To bring the football metaphor back, you're missing an open goal here I think.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Who is trying to convict Sky of doping?

Careful with stretching things when you are countering someone who accurately points out inconsistencies in the Sky story as a smear.

This is simple- Garmin were a better set up GT team than Sky in 2010, when the interview was given. No smear, its a statement of fact. The discussion then evolves to a "ah yes, but Sky could afford to buy a GT team" - thing is, Sky did not do that.

When Brailsford made his "winning a Tour with a British rider within 5 years" I remember thinking it was a lofty ambition, which is good. But looking at the then (2009) current British riders it was difficult to see anyone fitting that role, with the possible exception of Keannaugh.

So people that believe Sky are doping don't want them convicted of it? I realise they are not the authorities so won't actually be part of the conviction process but it's a semantic point, of which I know you are very fond.

I'll agree that Garmin were a better set up when Wiggins signed for them, but it doesn't make his statement inaccurate, given the ambitions of the British team, and also since Wiggins essentially signed for the 'starting roster'. I don't think Wiggins or anyone at Sky thought he was going to win a GT in 2010, so the state of the relative squads at the time Wiggins signed isn't relevant to that. I maintain that trying to spin the move into something more sinister is a red herring, or trying to paint what Wiggins said as blatant lie.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Yes, he did, just not at the clean team, it was not possible there, what brings me back to the departure of Roger Palfreeman a few months within Wiggins signing for Sky.

No one has an explanation why he left BC and Sky. Time for Kimmage cum suis to get to the root of that imho.

Jimmy, stop comparing football with cycling, ever seen a cycling team with a debt of half a billion Euro's? That is trully a case of apples et oranges. With the budget team Sky has they wouldn't be in the top ten here in Holland soccerwise, in cycling they are the big guns...

And, cyclists do have a different moral, to some degree that is. They do not have to deal with a somehow imbecile fanbase like football teams have to, imagine Wayne Rooney going to his boyhood dream club Liverpool...

In cycling we do not have that problem.Thanks, forgot all about that.

The comparison stands because I was trying to illustrate the soundbites athletes produce when they switch employees. If you'd like another how about Hamilton switching one of the fastest cars on the grid for one that is unlikely to bring him many F1 podiums. He'll talk about a fresh challenge, and potential, and that he believes the car will be competitive, he doesn't talk about the commercial commitments he was unhappy with at Maclaren, or the fact he felt everyone liked Button more, or the fact Mercedes were willing to pay him more.

I just don't see there is anything wrong at all with what he said.

As for riding clean at Garmin and juiced at Sky, I thought the commonly held theory was that he was on the juice in 2009 and his break-out in the Tour was down to that. So the new theory is that he wanted the juice, wasn't going to get at Garmin so went to Sky for it instead? Highly speculative, and that's being generous.

 

[Fearless Greg Lemond]

It's funny, because you're obviously quite anti-Sky, and the Palfreeman departure - as I seem to remember - has been explained in some detail.

Then you would have no problems sharing that/those detail/s.

I just don't see there is anything wrong at all with what he said.

Shall we agree to disagree then?

As for riding clean at Garmin and juiced at Sky, I thought the commonly held theory was that he was on the juice in 2009 and his break-out in the Tour was down to that. So the new theory is that he wanted the juice, wasn't going to get at Garmin so went to Sky for it instead? Highly speculative, and that's being generous.

I did NOT say he was clean at Garmin. He was training with BC I said, as well for his weightloss.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

So people that believe Sky are doping don't want them convicted of it? I realise they are not the authorities so won't actually be part of the conviction process but it's a semantic point, of which I know you are very fond.

I do like semantic points, it usually cuts to the chase in a conversation.

However, nothing in what you said was semantic - it was just a plain ol strawman.

I'll agree that Garmin were a better set up when Wiggins signed for them, but it doesn't make his statement inaccurate, given the ambitions of the British team, and also since Wiggins essentially signed for the 'starting roster'. I don't think Wiggins or anyone at Sky thought he was going to win a GT in 2010, so the state of the relative squads at the time Wiggins signed isn't relevant to that. I maintain that trying to spin the move into something more sinister is a red herring, or trying to paint what Wiggins said as blatant lie.

Stop smearing Sky!!
Seriously, the highlighted is the only point. In 2010, Garmin on paper were better than Sky for GTs.

 

[JimmyFingers]

Stop smearing Sky!!

Seriously, the highlighted is the only point. In 2010, Garmin on paper were better than Sky for GTs.

I'll disagree; it's not the only point. 2010 was their first year as a pro-team, no-one expected or believed they would win a GT in their first year. However they have done in their third, so clearly Bradley he's going to Sky to win GTs has been born out. Might he have done it at Garmin? A distinct possibility, but the fact he has at Sky surely just blows any accusation of lying out of the water.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

When Brailsford made his "winning a Tour with a British rider within 5 years" I remember thinking it was a lofty ambition, which is good. But looking at the then (2009) current British riders it was difficult to see anyone fitting that role, with the possible exception of Keannaugh.

I wonder how much of the "Tour win in 5 years" statement was simply something that was needed within News International to justify the sponsorship budget? Whether it was a realitic aim at that time is quite an issue, but it must have been an easier "sell" internally if the stated aim was to win the Tour than if it had been to achieve top tens in a lot of races and bag the odd consolation victory.

There can have been no certainty back in 2009 that any of the academy guys would develop. Even a junior/espoir of the prowess of Greg LeMond is not guaranteed to progress, so DB's claim that he'd already identified the rider with the right "numbers" seems a bit fanciful.

 

[northstar]

Your point still stands - most sportspeople are just following the money. Didn't Wiggins say in that interview with Kimmage upthread that Garmin were offering him the same deal, though?

Yes he did. Wiggins said:

“And I know JV [Vaughters] didn’t want to let me go, but for my career, and to see how much further I can take this, I had to. It wasn’t financial. They [Garmin] offered me exactly the same money as what Dave offered me to stay, but I would have kicked myself if I had had to look at this team [Sky] from the outside and knowing what I was missing out on."

So according to Wiggins he did not leave for the money. Why are people saying he did? Or is Wiggins bending the truth?

 

[MartinGT]

Yes he did. Wiggins said:

“And I know JV [Vaughters] didn’t want to let me go, but for my career, and to see how much further I can take this, I had to. It wasn’t financial. They [Garmin] offered me exactly the same money as what Dave offered me to stay, but I would have kicked myself if I had had to look at this team [Sky] from the outside and knowing what I was missing out on."

So according to Wiggins he did not leave for the money. Why are people saying he did? Or is Wiggins bending the truth?

Its a total myth if you ask me......

 

[Dr. Maserati]

I'll disagree; it's not the only point. 2010 was their first year as a pro-team, no-one expected or believed they would win a GT in their first year. However they have done in their third, so clearly Bradley he's going to Sky to win GTs has been born out. Might he have done it at Garmin? A distinct possibility, but the fact he has at Sky surely just blows any accusation of lying out of the water.

Cool...... What exactly was the difference then between Sky 2010 & Sky 2012?

I wonder how much of the "Tour win in 5 years" statement was simply something that was needed within News International to justify the sponsorship budget? Whether it was a realitic aim at that time is quite an issue, but it must have been an easier "sell" internally if the stated aim was to win the Tour than if it had been to achieve top tens in a lot of races and bag the odd consolation victory.

I took it as a simple lofty ambition - I see nothing wrong with that at all. But it was difficult to see who could emerge to fill that role.

There can have been no certainty back in 2009 that any of the academy guys would develop. Even a junior/espoir of the prowess of Greg LeMond is not guaranteed to progress, so DB's claim that he'd already identified the rider with the right "numbers" seems a bit fanciful.[/QUOTE]
Did he say that??

 

[northstar]

Back to Brailsford approaching Wiggins during 2009 Tour. I thought a rest day for a rider would be for actually resting and maybe race strategy meetings. Turns out it is a good day to shop around for a new contract because all the industry people are in town.

I also thought, during a race, a rider would focus all their energies on winning the race. But instead clandestine meetings between opportunistic riders and poaching team managers is the norm. During a race?? 2009 Tour ran July 4 – 26. Wiggins met Brailsford in Limoges on July 13. Why not wait 2 weeks until the race is over? What a circus!

I have a lot to learn. Will try to keep up.

 

[Dr. Maserati]

Back to Brailsford approaching Wiggins during 2009 Tour. I thought a rest day for a rider would be for actually resting and maybe race strategy meetings. Turns out it is a good day to shop around for a new contract because all the industry people are in town.

I also thought, during a race, a rider would focus all their energies on winning the race. But instead clandestine meetings between opportunistic riders and poaching team managers is the norm. During a race?? 2009 Tour ran July 4 – 26. Wiggins met Brailsford in Limoges on July 13. Why not wait 2 weeks until the race is over? What a circus!

I have a lot to learn. Will try to keep up.

Officially, no rider is allowed to sign until September.
However the big names will be approached long before and everyone wants an agreement as early as possible. No-one wants to be scrambling for a contract by September.
However, most approaches are not done like Wiggins. The reason why Brad went on the rest day was because he was under contract with Garmin.
Rest days are usually a short ride (2 or 3 hours!!) and catching up with family who visit.

 

[Wallace and Gromit]

so DB's claim that he'd already identified the rider with the right "numbers" seems a bit fanciful.[/QUOTE]

Did he say that??

I don't have the exact quote to hand. There was definitely some reference to the academy guys and their "numbers". He might have been using class of 2008/09 to extrapolate to what type of rider he might have on the team by 2014 rather than saying he'd identified the rider concerned.

I remember thinking it was optimistic at best at the time, given that even Pete Kennaugh will only be 26 come 2014, with his peak years due 2016 onwards.

 

[zalacain]

Newcastle United have just signed 5 French players. Do you think they came to the North East for its Parisian like cafe culture, the walks along Riviera like prom in Whitley Bay, the vineyards of the Tyne Valley or because we tripled their wages?

Well it won't be for the Arts. Newcastle has just cut their funding by 100% but Newky Brown is good for washing your hair.

 

[Haynzie]

Officially, no rider is allowed to sign until September.
However the big names will be approached long before and everyone wants an agreement as early as possible. No-one wants to be scrambling for a contract by September.
However, most approaches are not done like Wiggins. The reason why Brad went on the rest day was because he was under contract with Garmin.
Rest days are usually a short ride (2 or 3 hours!!) and catching up with family who visit.

Absolutely correct. In fact the last week of the Tour tends to be when agreements are reached, although as Dr Maserati suggests, they are always informal at this stage. It is, if you like, something of a recruitment fair in the final week.

It is a little unfair to attack Wiggins for his move, or the manner in which it took place. Such happenings are frequent for the higher value riders, although not always so public.

On a different note, some of you might be interested in what Cavendish has to say about his move from Sky to OPQS. In particular, may I draw your attention to this particular paragraph outlining the differences between Sky and his new team:

"Cavendish seems to enjoy the laid back mentality at Omega-Pharma-Quick Step much more than the drilled and disciplined corporate mentality at Team Sky. His early season success at the Tour of San Luis and the Tour of Qatar have helped him gel with his new teammates"

Full text here:
http://www.cyclingnews.com/news/cavendish-reveals-his-frustrations-about-his-year-at-sky

 

[northstar]

Officially, no rider is allowed to sign until September.
However the big names will be approached long before and everyone wants an agreement as early as possible. No-one wants to be scrambling for a contract by September.
However, most approaches are not done like Wiggins. The reason why Brad went on the rest day was because he was under contract with Garmin.
Rest days are usually a short ride (2 or 3 hours!!) and catching up with family who visit.

Thanks for the explanation. I'm new to cycling and what goes on outside the racing is fascinating stuff. The fact that a rider under contract will negotiate with another team during a race blows me away. Sounds like a rest day is more of a mental health day than anything else.