The Patrick Lefevere Depreciation Thread

Page 4 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Everyone that I've met in my life have met a nice character who is an alcoholic.
All my own life I've only ever met alcoholics who were convinced themselves they were nice, friendly, funny, smart etc.

Once you get to know them everything quickly unravels.

I still haven't even seen the video of Lefevere but if he's indeed smashed out of his mind, a lot of his other behavior in recent months is explained (& it's the result of both the drinking & the bad character which usually go hand in hand).
 
Reactions: noob
I think there is a certain appeal to riding in a team ran by Lefevere as long as you align with his views and/or are willing to compromise enough. Because it looks like, if you are a rider that he can appreciate, and give it you all he will also have your back and play his part in creating a very strong team atmosphere. The main downsides seem to be that personalities/expectations can clash much more than anticipated (e.g. Thomas De Gendt) and that the whole thing can come across a bit 'cultish'. As in that once you fall outside of the Wolfpack Lefevere's support will fall away just as quickly.

=
 
It's a chicken/egg situation with women's cycling. You have to have the infrastructure, coverage, robust race calendar and viable teams. I like that some highly visible men's teams like Movi, Jumbo, DE, DSM also have women's teams.

Yeah, it's not yet a money-maker, but to me it's the Right Thing to Do. Lefevere is just being a contrarian here, I think. I bet a QS women's team would be a pretty big draw.
 
This spree is not going to end well for him. I am disapponted at the lack of reaction in cycling media world. In any other sport, he would be history long ago...
 
It pure Capitalism, for profit motive. The belgian Govt/cycling fed can start a national team to help grow the women's road sport and talent till it becomes viable for the the private sector to step in.
It‘s pure capitalism in the usual sense that private company owners pursue their own profits while being protected and subsidised by the state in countless ways - from municipalities paying for races to sponsorship by state owned companies, passing through sports departments providing stipends for potential olympians and grants to cycling clubs and development teams. Not to mention providing and then closing roads. Even the model of change you suggest consists of the state paying to create an infrastructure so that the likes of Lefevere can cash in later without having to invest now.

The state would be entirely within its rights to use its absolutely essential role in the business model of men’s teams to force them to run women’s teams, whether directly or by putting the squeeze on race organisers and the cycling federation.
 
It's a chicken/egg situation with women's cycling. You have to have the infrastructure, coverage, robust race calendar and viable teams. I like that some highly visible men's teams like Movi, Jumbo, DE, DSM also have women's teams.

Yeah, it's not yet a money-maker, but to me it's the Right Thing to Do. Lefevere is just being a contrarian here, I think. I bet a QS women's team would be a pretty big draw.
this is where people need to be slapped in the face - its one thing to acknowledge its right thing to do, its completely asinine to suggest that concrete person should pay for it

i find it offensively stupid how internet folks like to manage other peoples money

if you are so pro women i applaud you, go for it, invest be a trailblazer, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE - suggesting somebody else should do it with their money is laughable

count your own money pal
 
It's not about whether he should build a women's team. I can understand PL if he thinks it's not worth it for him to invest in a women's team, it's the way he expresses his stance which makes it sound quite ignorant and derogatory. It's one thing to say "I'm a business man and there's not enough in it for me", but he sounds pretty much like "I'm simply not interested in women's sport". He doesn't even acknowledge Lotte Kopecky who's one of the best female riders right now, but it sounds like he hardly knows her.
 
It's not about whether he should build a women's team. I can understand PL if he thinks it's not worth it for him to invest in a women's team, it's the way he expresses his stance which makes it sound quite ignorant and derogatory. It's one thing to say "I'm a business man and there's not enough in it for me", but he sounds pretty much like "I'm simply not interested in women's sport". He doesn't even acknowledge Lotte Kopecky who's one of the best female riders right now, but it sounds like he hardly knows her.
what is wrong with not being interested in womens sport?

are you serious? its perfectly normal to not be interested in it ...plenty of people arent, which is why you dont see more money going into it
 
Reactions: Bullrun
this is where people need to be slapped in the face - its one thing to acknowledge its right thing to do, its completely asinine to suggest that concrete person should pay for it

i find it offensively stupid how internet folks like to manage other peoples money

if you are so pro women i applaud you, go for it, invest be a trailblazer, THIS IS YOUR CHANCE - suggesting somebody else should do it with their money is laughable

count your own money pal
The whole sport of men’s cycling is dependent on “other people’s money” in the form of innumerable state subsidies and subventions, direct and indirect. There are no swashbuckling entrepreneurs who built it all themselves, they are all beneficiaries of assistance from society as a whole. The offensive stupidity is in thinking that it is somehow stupid or illegitimate for those who benefit to have social obligations placed on them in return.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS