Tom 'Pidders' Pidcock

[samhocking]

He's not on €4M. €2.7M seems to be the common figure published. He might have a big bonus salary boost built in if he wins a GT or something to get to €4M though. I heard he is on the same as they were going to pay Adam Yates to stay at Ineos, who was on €2M and UAE offered him €2.7M which obviously he went with.

 

[Tim Cahill]

They need reinforcements, a like-for-like replacement. Luckily Radcliffe has just the man already primed, eager and on the payroll.

 

[Wyndbrook]

They need reinforcements, a like-for-like replacement. Luckily Radcliffe has just the man already primed, eager and on the payroll.

Four nil down in Amercas Cup, perhaps he needs him on the boat more.

 

[xo 1]

Clashes are happening in all teams from time-to-time, some public, some just glimpsed on social media, some purely internal. Doesn't usually mean a team will end just because some people are not getting on, this is real life with real emotions flying.

Perhaps I misunderstand your point, but my skepticism on the continued viability of INEOS is not because there is a clash of personalities but rather because INEOS appears determined to allow such a clash to run off one of their most talented riders out of pique.

 

[Gratemans]

What he's worth has to do with how many eyeballs he attracts, not how many races he wins. He's the most exciting British cyclist by a long shot (which is a large market, I believe), interviews well, and wins with style. He's worth a lot more than Geraint regardless of who has the higher level in grand tours.

On the bike he is way more exciting (ok, WAY more exciting) but I gotta say I always liked Geraint in interviews. He seems pretty candid and spontaneous. His speech after winning the Tour was not too shabby either. I actually thought it was pretty refreshing after having watched sooo many dull speeches at the Champs.

 

[yaco]

What he's worth has to do with how many eyeballs he attracts, not how many races he wins. He's the most exciting British cyclist by a long shot (which is a large market, I believe), interviews well, and wins with style. He's worth a lot more than Geraint regardless of who has the higher level in grand tours.

Ultimately, you are employed by a team to win races. Nothing more or nothing less.

 

[yaco]

He's not on €4M. €2.7M seems to be the common figure published. He might have a big bonus salary boost built in if he wins a GT or something to get to €4M though. I heard he is on the same as they were going to pay Adam Yates to stay at Ineos, who was on €2M and UAE offered him €2.7M which obviously he went with.

Even at 2.7m he is overpaid againsts results delivered. It's a fact of life that some riders are underpaid and some are overpaid. Pidcock is in the former category.

 

[Bolder]

Ultimately, you are employed by a team to win races. Nothing more or nothing less.

Lachlan Morton says hi.

Actually for some riders image and marketability increases their value. As in most sports.

 

[Oldermanish]

What he's worth has to do with how many eyeballs he attracts, not how many races he wins. He's the most exciting British cyclist by a long shot (which is a large market, I believe), interviews well, and wins with style. He's worth a lot more than Geraint regardless of who has the higher level in grand tours.

Big time cyclocross and the Olympics gave him much needed exposure as a freestanding performer, too.

 

[awavey]

Perhaps I misunderstand your point, but my skepticism on the continued viability of INEOS is not because there is a clash of personalities but rather because INEOS appears determined to allow such a clash to run off one of their most talented riders out of pique.

I think it's a combination of things, only last year we were taking those merger rumours very seriously and Sir Jim doesn't seem to care about them much, assuming he ever did. They've not got much of a leadership running the team anymore, Sir Dave is out of the picture, it sounds like it's run by a committee of Ineos managers,some who have no background in cycling.

Consequently issues that might well have been happening at other teams and resolved quickly, quietly or nipped in the bud are spilling out into the public domain.

They haven't signed any marquee riders to lead the team for a while, Bernal is never going to get back to a level to challenge Pog or Vinge, they seem all in on developing younger riders by this years signings so far, which is a "cheaper" way to fill spaces and run your team, so there's clear budgeting going on.

They're absolutely a team in fast decline results wise, at what point does the guy who's already bored with them go you know what I'm not interested in spending 50million euros on this anymore.

They're supposedly top 3 team budget wise, yet currently ranked 6th, could easily finish this year in 7th.

Come next year the could be lower still if they lose Pidcock and time finally catches up with Viviani or Thomas.

 

[stonerider]

Come next year the could be lower still if they lose Pidcock and time finally catches up with Viviani or Thomas.

Thomas is only good for one race per year...which would be a top 5 in the Giro at this point in his career. And that's only if he doesn't let himself go too much in the off-season. He's a one peak a year type of guy at this late stage of his career.

 

[theyoungest]

What he's worth has to do with how many eyeballs he attracts, not how many races he wins. He's the most exciting British cyclist by a long shot (which is a large market, I believe), interviews well, and wins with style. He's worth a lot more than Geraint regardless of who has the higher level in grand tours.

Yes, Britain is a large market, but Brits are also comparatively overrated simply because they're British, and Anglophone media are dominant. You write what you know, and someone like Pidcock is closer to home for these people than, say, Mattias Skjelmose. Probably a rider of similar talent, but I don't know anything about him other than that he's Danish. And I would guess he is on the payroll for a lot less than Pidcock.

 

[Anderis]

Ultimately, you are employed by a team to win races. Nothing more or nothing less.

You're very wrong about this. Cycling is a sport, which is ultimately an entertainment industry. You're employed to make people turn up, to make people notice the sponsors, make the money agree- or simply put- to make a profit to your employer, just like in any other industry. Winning races is not the only factor that goes into that. Appeal to the audience, marketability, has always been a big factor in how much money people make in the entertainment industry because it determines how much money their employer can make when they're on the show. Ultimately, it wouldn't matter if you won every race in the world if nobody turned up to watch. And if you DNFed every race but still increased the brand awareness of your sponsor by the factor of hundreds of millions of dollars, the teams would still fight to have you onboard and pay you well, because this is what makes a cycling team financially viable, not some raw numbers in the race results table.

 

[elguapo]

Simply there's an attitude problem, either the rider can't accept the team's philosophy or the team has stopped hoping for what the pampered rider could bring to the team after x number of years.

 

[samhocking]

Perhaps I misunderstand your point, but my skepticism on the continued viability of INEOS is not because there is a clash of personalities but rather because INEOS appears determined to allow such a clash to run off one of their most talented riders out of pique.

What makes you think ineos were determined to allow anything? I would probably side with Thomas who summed it up in todays podcast that Pidcock comes with his own internal team around him from CX/MTB/Trinity, but Ineos is not 'Team Pidcock', there's 30 others riders. It would seem the beef is mostly between his off-road management clashing with the road management.
While I thought Pidcocks migration from off-road and 2024 Olympic goals could transition to the road team in the last half of this season, I would take it that Pidcock's entourage wants to turn Ineos into Team Pidcock. Those guys are used to utter domination off-road, they won everything they set out to do and with nothing like the budget of the road squad. It will be hard to see it working out when other GC riders also have ambitions and also no doubt been promised team resources to help them achieve success too.

 

[yaco]

You're very wrong about this. Cycling is a sport, which is ultimately an entertainment industry. You're employed to make people turn up, to make people notice the sponsors, make the money agree- or simply put- to make a profit to your employer, just like in any other industry. Winning races is not the only factor that goes into that. Appeal to the audience, marketability, has always been a big factor in how much money people make in the entertainment industry because it determines how much money their employer can make when they're on the show. Ultimately, it wouldn't matter if you won every race in the world if nobody turned up to watch. And if you DNFed every race but still increased the brand awareness of your sponsor by the factor of hundreds of millions of dollars, the teams would still fight to have you onboard and pay you well, because this is what makes a cycling team financially viable, not some raw numbers in the race results table.

The riders on big wages are paid to win races. For example, Vingegaard is hardly the most inspiring or interesting character, however, he gets paid high wages because he wins often and in big races. I am guessing that the sponsors must be happy with their exposure and brand recognition or he would receive lower wages. Yes, there are lesser riders who are more marketable and they probably receive an inflated wage compared to their capabilities, however, they would not be on big wages. I have already pointed out that through history, some riders get paid overs and some get paid unders. Thats a fact of life. Pidcock who falls into the former category is on a high wage and his race results don't justify that salary, no matter his marketabilityu.

 

[will-10]

Gotta love a smoke-and-mirrors situation like this where everyone knows nothing but acts like they have insider information from somewhere. You guys are the best

 

[Sciatic]

Gotta love a smoke-and-mirrors situation like this where everyone knows nothing but acts like they have insider information from somewhere. You guys are the best

Hey, heading into the road off-season, gotta have some things to talk about

 

[Wyndbrook]

I'm assume guily as anyone, but hey world track champs later this week, the razzmatazz of the track champions league, and cross a couple of times a week. Lots to look forward to and talk about.

 

[Axel Hangleck]

Thats a fact of life. Pidcock who falls into the former category is on a high wage and his race results don't justify that salary, no matter his marketability.

Why doesn't he justify his salary? The Olympics are a far bigger deal than you realise, and he's won them twice. And plenty of other races across 3 disciplines.
Unless you're the classic roadie fan, who thinks off-roaders should be on low wages.

 

[Netserk]

Why doesn't he justify his salary? The Olympics are a far bigger deal than you realise, and he's won them twice. And plenty of other races across 3 disciplines.
Unless you're the classic roadie fan, who thinks off-roaders should be on low wages.

Which one of the two following victories do you think promotes INEOS the most?

 

[Salmon Spread]

Which one of the two following victories do you think promotes INEOS the most?

It's gotta be the second victory?
I'm a cycling fan and I don't even know how to watch the Amstel Gold Race.

 

[Netserk]

It's gotta be the second victory?
I'm a cycling fan and I don't even know how to watch the Amstel Gold Race.

Of those who saw or heard of his victory in Paris, but didn't see nor hear of his Amstel victory, how many do you think thought of INEOS when they saw Pidcock?

Was his gold in Paris used to promote INEOS in mass advertisement immediately afterwards?

 

[King Of The Wolds]

Ultimately, you are employed by a team to win races. Nothing more or nothing less.

No, as a professional cyclist he's employed to create column inches and clicks for his sponsor. I don't know exactly how much he's paid and how much exposure he's generated in £, and whilst he's not someone who transcends the sport, like a Cavendish, he certainly seems to attract more media interest than his road wins would suggest.

 

[yaco]

Why doesn't he justify his salary? The Olympics are a far bigger deal than you realise, and he's won them twice. And plenty of other races across 3 disciplines.
Unless you're the classic roadie fan, who thinks off-roaders should be on low wages.

We are discussing road racing. MVDP and VWA successfully ride different disciplines, however, 99% of discussion is about their performance in road races.