The Patrick Lefevere Depreciation Thread

[BR2]

On the whole story with Alaphilippe: it's beyond me why one of the most experienced and successful general managers of a cycling team would "insult" one of his top riders who is still almost 2 years under contract because he wants to get rid of him or just shout out his anger. While the story is as usual blown out of proportions (which is something he probably knows before answering), the simple reality might be that he knows his riders all to well. He wants to provoke a reaction. We have seen this before. For example, in 2019, after Remco was 4th in the Tour of Turkey early in the season, he simply said that Remco was "too fat" to take the title. This again was a big controversy at that time but the reality was that Remco knew that this was the issue and was motivated to work on it with instant results.

I still find it very stupid and wrong to publically fat-shame a young athlete who is that ambitious in a sport where eating disorders are very common. Wasn't a coach in the Evenepoel-thread on record saying that Remco was actually restricting his eating too much before and that he has now learned to take that slightly looser? Anyway there is no reason to ever say that in public about a rider, even if many will say that is completely normal. You just don't.

I don't doubt that Lefevere has done a lot of things right as a manager. But do we have to go to all these lengths to excuse his awful behaviour?

 

[Bonimenier]

I still find it very stupid and wrong to publically fat-shame a young athlete who is that ambitious in a sport where eating disorders are very common. Wasn't a coach in the Evenepoel-thread on record saying that Remco was actually restricting his eating too much before and that he has now learned to take that slightly looser? Anyway there is no reason to ever say that in public about a rider, even if many will say that is completely normal. You just don't.

I don't doubt that Lefevere has done a lot of things right as a manager. But do we have to go to all these lengths to excuse his awful behaviour?

Yet to see him behave awfully.

 

[BR2]

Yet to see him behave awfully.

Fine. For a lot of people on the forum it seems totally normal and fine to do all these things. For me they are not.

 

[peterfin]

I still find it very stupid and wrong to publically fat-shame a young athlete who is that ambitious in a sport where eating disorders are very common. Wasn't a coach in the Evenepoel-thread on record saying that Remco was actually restricting his eating too much before and that he has now learned to take that slightly looser? Anyway there is no reason to ever say that in public about a rider, even if many will say that is completely normal. You just don't.

I don't doubt that Lefevere has done a lot of things right as a manager. But do we have to go to all these lengths to excuse his awful behaviour?

It's not to excuse his behaviour but to explain it. The Zeitgeist tells us that such comments are incorrect behaviour and, if they need to be made, that they should be filtered and made impersonal to protect the ego of an individual. PL is definitely not from this epoch and hasn't changed. He knows his comments are effective and he probably knows the ego of his top guns really well to assess the impact.

 

[Panda Claws]

Lefevere just said that he expected more results from Alaphilippe and he would work along with a transfer (even though he is still under contract for 2 years) if Alaphilippe so desired.

How you all manage to twist this into something so heinous and spiteful is beyond me.

 

[Jumbo Visma Fan :)]

Yet to see him behave awfully.

I would rethink that statement. Even in not this instance then previous instances. I would would’ve suggested taking a further look into his comments before you posted that.

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

For all the fanboys in this thread, there will be a 6 episode docuseries about the man, the myth, the Patrick.

Binnenkort op Canvas: "Op mijn graf zal niet staan dat ik de Tour niet heb gewonnen"

In alle grote wielerverhalen die Vlaanderen de voorbije 30 jaar in de ban hielden, had Patrick Lefevere wel ergens een hand. Wie is de man achter de succesvolle manager en hoe heeft hij die status van "Godfather van het wielrennen" bereikt? De zesdelige reeks Patrick Lefevere, Godfather van de...

sporza.be

 

[CyclistAbi]

Will Remco have to watch it?

On a more serious note. He achieved much in his life and hence he deserves it.

 

[Peyroteo94]

He just drop a bunch of trues about women cycling. Equality is good but not when money is involved.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Under fire:

https://www.cyclingnews.com/news/lefevere-claims-womens-cycling-is-artificially-pushed-by-minimum-salaries/

So he had a change of heart and is trying to elevate a women's team to WorldTour level. Looks like that didn't happen in 2023 but likely it's imminent. And in that case i guess is prepared to pay each team member at least the minimum wage. Currently set at €32,102. He gave an example of an established female cyclist currently earning €250/month. Hence somehow i feel he can't really be considered as a part of the problem here.

As for the remark. That currently things are artificially pushed. On the women's side. They are. Is that a bad thing? Likely not. Some standards need to be established. For them to after become a norm. And we are talking about minimal standards on the highest level. And not some charity. So i see more solutions than problems ATM in this regard.

So i guess for the people that feel the urge to cancel the geezer. Fine. But only after you will establish and elevate a women's team to WorldTour level. Until then i guess we will just have to get along. On the social media.

P.S. And it looks like the PL documentary will be released on International Women's Day.

 

[CyclistAbi]

If i read correctly PL said when he will die. On his tombstone it won't say: "Didn't win the Tour". My suggestion would be to reserve €1,000,000.00 as a bonus. And give it to the person that first wins the Tour for you. As now you have more options. But don't backtrack after. On how you would give one person only half. A Tour win is a Tour win. And you want it but don't have it yet. Just don't over do it. And for example to sell men's team if women's team will get there first.

 

[Unchained]

You fail to see Alaphilippe and Lefevere have a professional relationship for 13 years... Still you assume you know, based on hearsay, that Alaphilippe has been disrespected, and that there is (your words) a "problem" between PL and JA...
There was a problem with Bennett, yes, but the only problem with Alaphilippe is the media trying to spin a story that isn't there.

(this message has been approved by the Paddy Fanboy Club - PFC™)

What if this team doesn't buy into the narrative that there is inner team tension? If Alaphilippe continues on his current trajectory to 110% recovered, stays upright, he and Remco are going to ruin many races for other teams.. Both riders have incredible skill set and can be a primary in many races both one day and stage races. There is no outward indication that Alaphilippe is being negatively impacted by a supposed issue with Lef..I see the opposite and see him repeating his attacking style and getting stronger week by week. He may find there is a different pressure but all those weird management mash ups were directors don't know if LeMond is the leader or is it Hinnault? Armstrong or Alberto? You see people who have the wheels fall off like Roglic and team tries to salvage something when designated leader lags behind.. just don't see JA as having anything but upside.. and people make expect Remco to only go upward and onwards but he is still young and doesn't have deep stage race record so if he falters a little team has good options

 

[tobydawq]

If i read correctly PL said when he will die. On his tombstone it won't say: "Didn't win the Tour". My suggestion would be to reserve €1,000,000.00 as a bonus. And give it to the person that first wins the Tour for you. As now you have more options. But don't backtrack after. On how you would give one person only half. A Tour win is a Tour win. And you want it but don't have it yet. Just don't over do it. And for example to sell men's team if women's team will get there first.

What are you even saying?

 

[Logic-is-your-friend]

So Lefevere is saying that the top of women's isn't broad enough, that the level drops off significantly behind the top performers of women's cycling. An example he gives is that they needed to adjust the OOT limit at the TDF last year, or that half the peloton would have been going home. His reasoning is that those women aren't competitive and simply do not have the level to be a pro cyclist, so they don't deserve a minimum wage. Bottom line, you don't want to pay people who are that bad at their job. That's the gist of it.

I can certainly understand what he means and where he's coming from. If you perform badly at your job, if you can't cut it, if your performance is so much lower than what should be expected, you would soon find yourself without a job, regardless of the type of job. If you are a bad nurse, a bad teacher, a bad lawyer... you will soon find yourself without a job, and without a minimum wage as well.

However, i also think it's the best and quickest way in order to get women interested in taking up the sport and actually trying to make a living out of it. A lot of possibly talented women might otherwise not even consider getting into it, and rather get a regular job which they know puts food on the table. A minimum wage means there will quickly be more competition for those spots (since they now offer a guaranteed wage) which in turn means natural selection, so the best will rise to the occasion much quicker now. Yes, it is artificially pushed in a sense, but i think it beats the alternatives in cost-effectiveness, in speed and overall cost. With a minimum wage, you can attract all sorts of athletes within just a few seasons. The level could go up dramatically very quickly, because now it becomes a viable option to pursue as an income/job for every women who is good at endurance sports and likes cycling. What are the alternatives? Putting money in all sorts of campaigns in order to get women interested in cycling "in a more natural way"? How long would that take? Generations. How much would that cost, globally? But of course, it wouldn't be the teams that would need to pay for those programs and campaigns, it would be UCI and national federations who would need to get involved. So basically he would like to see women's cycling progress slower at no cost to him, than have it progress faster on his dime. That's what it comes down to. It's short term thinking, maybe because he doesn't intend to keep doing this much longer. But i'm sure the teams would reap the benefits of having a stronger, more competitive women's peloton within a few years, instead of having to wait for that to happen over the next few decades.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

So Lefevere is saying that the top of women's isn't broad enough, that the level drops off significantly behind the top performers of women's cycling. An example he gives is that they needed to adjust the OOT limit at the TDF last year, or that half the peloton would have been going home. His reasoning is that those women aren't competitive and simply do not have the level to be a pro cyclist, so they don't deserve a minimum wage. Bottom line, you don't want to pay people who are that bad at their job. That's the gist of it.

I can certainly understand what he means and where he's coming from. If you perform badly at your job, if you can't cut it, if your performance is so much lower than what should be expected, you would soon find yourself without a job, regardless of the type of job. If you are a bad nurse, a bad teacher, a bad lawyer... you will soon find yourself without a job, and without a minimum wage as well.

However, i also think it's the best and quickest way in order to get women interested in taking up the sport and actually trying to make a living out of it. A lot of possibly talented women might otherwise not even consider getting into it, and rather get a regular job which they know puts food on the table. A minimum wage means there will quickly be more competition for those spots (since they now offer a guaranteed wage) which in turn means natural selection, so the best will rise to the occasion much quicker now. Yes, it is artificially pushed in a sense, but i think it beats the alternatives in cost-effectiveness, in speed and overall cost. With a minimum wage, you can attract all sorts of athletes within just a few seasons. The level could go up dramatically very quickly, because now it becomes a viable option to pursue as an income/job for every women who is good at endurance sports and likes cycling. What are the alternatives? Putting money in all sorts of campaigns in order to get women interested in cycling "in a more natural way"? How long would that take? Generations. How much would that cost, globally? But of course, it wouldn't be the teams that would need to pay for those programs and campaigns, it would be UCI and national federations who would need to get involved. So basically he would like to see women's cycling progress slower at no cost to him, than have it progress faster on his dime. That's what it comes down to. It's short term thinking, maybe because he doesn't intend to keep doing this much longer. But i'm sure the teams would reap the benefits of having a stronger, more competitive women's peloton within a few years, instead of having to wait for that to happen over the next few decades.

And they've been waiting for decades already. Time will tell if teams will be able to keep increasing their budgets and how it will affect the level of the riders, but the UCI needed to take action. Right now the problem isn't really with the WWT teams though, but more with the conti teams. A good example here is of course Jesse Vandenbulcke earning a small salary even though she rode for one of the better non-WWT teams in Le Col - Wahoo. Luckily for her she's now been picked up by Human Powered Health.

The part about the time limits being extended is definitely untrue. They were 12% on the easier stages and 18% on the hardest, but last year they were up to 30% in both the Giro Donne and .Ceratizit Vuelta Challenge, so they were actually less generous than in other races. There were riders who missed it by about 10 seconds on stages and they weren't allowed to continue. And some those who were OTL had been involved in crashes and might have been able to survive otherwise. That doesn't mean there isn't a huge gap between the best and the worst riders, which isn't a surprise given that not all riders are able to fully commit to their cycling careers and others don't have a lot of experience yet, but the gap isn't as big as PL makes it sound like.

 

[BR2]

And they've been waiting for decades already. Time will tell if teams will be able to keep increasing their budgets and how it will affect the level of the riders, but the UCI needed to take action. Right now the problem isn't really with the WWT teams though, but more with the conti teams. A good example here is of course Jesse Vandenbulcke earning a small salary even though she rode for one of the better non-WWT teams in Le Col - Wahoo. Luckily for her she's now been picked up by Human Powered Health.

The part about the time limits being extended is definitely untrue. They were 12% on the easier stages and 18% on the hardest, but last year they were up to 30% in both the Giro Donne and .Ceratizit Vuelta Challenge, so they were actually less generous than in other races. There were riders who missed it by about 10 seconds on stages and they weren't allowed to continue. And some those who were OTL had been involved in crashes and might have been able to survive otherwise. That doesn't mean there isn't a huge gap between the best and the worst riders, which isn't a surprise given that not all riders are able to fully commit to their cycling careers and others don't have a lot of experience yet, but the gap isn't as big as PL makes it sound like.

I think the gap is very big at least in the effect at the end. It might not be a huge difference in performance ability, could well be that with a bit more or better training they are able to compete at the top, but at the moment there are, in so far I am with PL, a few select riders able to compete for the win, a dozen good helpers, and that's it. The rest are pack fodder. I know that is harsh, but that's the reality and the reason I still don't watch much women's cycling. It kills the races.

However, of course that doesn't HAVE to be that way. And the fact that women aren't paid well enough, and that for many the chances, when they decide whether to seriously follow this path or do something else with their lives, to make decent money with cycling are just not good enough, are huge factors.

I am against equal prize money in sports just because. If people don't want to watch a sport, which is entertainment after all, nobody has a "right" to earn anything. You earn as much as people are willing to give you, that's the general rule in entertainment, whether it's fair or not. A pretty, very well marketed girl may make a lot more money than a singer that's 100 times better.

But wages are something different, they are not prize money. I think a minimum wage that allows to pay your ordinary bills without much worries is in order in cycling, and this minimum wage should not be about how good you are - it isn't in men's and it shouldn't be in women's. It's a minimum to enable the riders to train as good as they can and hopefully have some money left when they retire so that they have a few years to persue another education/ change to another profession.

 

[Red Rick]

I really don't like when people argue that sub world class pros in a sport shouldn't earn a living wage. If you don't have a somewhat functional pyramid for a sport and the money only goes to the top, there's no incentive to participate in the sport.

I am against equal prize money in sports just because.

Prize money is really just a marketing tool and an incentive for athletes. It may seem weird that you equalize that for PR reasons, but there's also no real reason not to do it in my opinion. Especially in cycling where prize money for men is a triviality compared to the wages anyway and where it can have a decent impact for the womens riders.

I do think the discussions about equal prize money, which are quite recurring in tennis, are very asinine.

 

[CyclistAbi]

What are you even saying?

You will need to be more specific. Vague one liners on the internet. That just doesn't cut it. Sorry.

 

[IndianCyclist]

Let the women work 100 kms for a pat on the back is what Patrick wants. Min wage will help bring in other talent who can support themselves instead of begging/working other jobs. If it is not financially viable donot hire or simply close the team. There are plenty of other teams that will replace that team or the WT can continue with lesser teams.

 

[Extinction]

I really don't like when people argue that sub world class pros in a sport shouldn't earn a living wage. If you don't have a somewhat functional pyramid for a sport and the money only goes to the top, there's no incentive to participate in the sport.

Prize money is really just a marketing tool and an incentive for athletes. It may seem weird that you equalize that for PR reasons, but there's also no real reason not to do it in my opinion. Especially in cycling where prize money for men is a triviality compared to the wages anyway and where it can have a decent impact for the womens riders.

I do think the discussions about equal prize money, which are quite recurring in tennis, are very asinine.

I think that all full time employment should pay a living wage. As far as prize money goes, it should reflect how much the races provide visibility and revenues to sponsors, not gender equality. That's simply the market.

 

[tobydawq]

You will need to be more specific. Vague one liners on the internet. That just doesn't cut it. Sorry.

Your phobia for conjunctions makes your posts impossible to read. Sorry.

 

[Samu Cuenca]

To be fair to PL, I must also remember to applaud that he has brought new money into women's cycling, even if it was the result of his sponsors pushing him rather than his own ambitions. I wouldn't mind it if he disappeared from the cycling world, but the sport obviously needs guys like him.

Then again the reason why it costs him a lot of money now, is also that he didn't commit sooner. Running a top women's team used to be a lot cheaper. Now they not only have to pay the riders more, they also need to have more of them, and AG Insurance - SQS also have devo team and junior teams.

 

[CyclistAbi]

Your phobia for conjunctions makes your posts impossible to read. Sorry.

So you are one of those people that take form over content? And would argue to death about it? Try harder to comprehend. The real meaning behind different things. You will be surprised. On how much more there is to it. Then it meets the surface.

But OK. One liner should do. You didn't comprehend it again. Due to the conjunctions. Whatever.

 

[DNP-Old]

Typing. Your. Posts. Like. This. Is. Not. Helping. Use. Your. Commas. Please. Thank. You. Sincerely.

 

[CyclistAbi]

@Samu Cuenca

AFAIK UCI is/was behind the minimal wage push. Hence they are doing something.

@Logic-is-your-friend

To elevate a women's team to WorldTour level, adhere to at least minimum standards set for the last member in roster. Win the Tour. In such case in my opinion you can't be considered as a part of the problem. And are pushing women cycling forward.

@BR2

It doesn't always really matter all that much. If due to biology men can outperform women. As we are currently not talking about equal pay. But some minimal standards set on the highest level. What i feel is an appropriate thing to do is to be able to make a living competing on the highest level. And this is now slowly becoming a reality for most women competing on WorldTour level. As it should be. The issue of some performing rather poorly ATM. The competition from lower levels should sort this out rather quickly.

@Red Rick

I agree that eventually things needs to improve on lower levels too. That is on why i have issues with Super League in football. They only care about dozen clubs or so. And the rest doesn't exist to them. As it costs money. Money they feel is theirs. About that.