rides like a girl said:
How come Canc was barely shown? ...Why was Lance shown more than other riders?
Cycling in the US won't grow unless the reporters and commentators explain the sport to the viewer....
First, as I noted before more than once, the coverage in this Tour will mostly be about Lance, regardless of how well he rides or what place he finishes. There's a lot of controversy surrounding him, he's very well known, and doesn't shy away from media attention. While you, and I and others may think that's not fair and race leaders should get more coverage, that's how how Versus covers the sport. The commentators are long-time friends with Lance, and Lance has wide appeal to the average person who rides a bike a few times a year and only watch one race in July. Even if they don't like him or think he's a bad guy, they know who he is. I'm not saying you have to like it, I don't think it's right either, but it's the way it is. Broadcasting is a for-profit business, and this is how Versus (owned by Comcast) has chosen to operate in order to please their sponsors and gain enough viewing share in the ratings.
If your friends and kids get more into cycling, I would encourage them to watch some other races, especially those on Universal Sports. While not Pulitzer winning commentary, Steve Schlanger is neutral and at least likes the sport, and Todd Gogulski has become an excellent commentator, giving unbiased information on riders, and explaining strategy well. Universal Sports covered the Giro, and will cover the Vuelta, arguable the two most exciting stage races in the world.
As to outside analysis through video production (video packages explaining strategy and rules, riders and teams, with experts using footage and graphics), unfortunately that is expensive to produce. It also requires producers to get in touch with experts, teams, riders, which can be time consuming and require one to be a linguist, plus the support required to pull it off.