Well done with the pro teams

[nvpacchi]

I'm confused about something now. FDJ missed out on the opportunity to go ProTour because they filed paperwork for 3 riders after the UCI deadline.

But didn't Astana also fail to hand in proper paperwork at the given deadline; yet they are still ProTour?

 

[theyoungest]

Already there.

It's hard to hate someone who's mostly invisible

 

[The Hitch]

Id like to ask whats up with the Colombian team? Are they going to try to get into any european races next year?

 

[IlCobraFan]

I'm confused about something now. FDJ missed out on the opportunity to go ProTour because they filed paperwork for 3 riders after the UCI deadline.

But didn't Astana also fail to hand in proper paperwork at the given deadline; yet they are still ProTour?

UCI loves logical and fair systems. Paperwork deciding the 18 best teams (ProTeams) is another great example

 

[Ryo Hazuki]

Id like to ask whats up with the Colombian team? Are they going to try to get into any european races next year?

which colombian team?? if you mean cafe de colombia they are waiting to see if they get pct license

 

[Mellow Velo]

Back to Team Geox's omission.
Nice one Pat.
Another UCI "global" (anglophone) decision about to implode?
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...ut-as-major-sponsor-of-the-Geox-TMC-team.aspx

 

[ingsve]

Back to Team Geox's omission.
Nice one Pat.
Another UCI "global" (anglophone) decision about to implode?
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...ut-as-major-sponsor-of-the-Geox-TMC-team.aspx

How about "Nice one Gianetti". He shouldn't go make promises he can't keep or at least when making promises like that he should make damn sure that he can deliver on it and in my opinion this will be Gianettis fault if Geox does drop out.

If your entire team is dependent on making the PT then you can't afford to not play within the rules that are given. They all knew that the results of the past two years would be very important but he was more interested in finding domestiques for Menchov and young talents than getting more secure points on board.

I know a lot of people support Gianettis effort and I too think that it would be more ideal if it was possible to think more long term and not have it all be about points but that's sadly not how the situation is.

You simply can't just ignore the system and then blame the system when you fail at living up to it. Gianetti made a mistake and I hope for the sake of his riders that Geox still honors their commitment to the team.

 

[Francois the Postman]

Back to Team Geox's omission.
Nice one Pat.
Another UCI "global" (anglophone) decision about to implode?
http://www.velonation.com/News/ID/6...ut-as-major-sponsor-of-the-Geox-TMC-team.aspx

The reason why it was so wrong to catapult teams into the PT with no track record, regardless who they sign up. It creates a model, even encourages a model, that is unsustainable. So you disrupt the model that did breed continuity, and inject upheaval only to let that implode too. Indeed Melo. Genius.

On the flip-side, in the longer run it also hurts the sport if sponsors who cause huge disruptions for other teams, by cherry picking big names and expect that that buys a "new" team a ticket, can't even muster the patience to take one year of wild cards on the chin -when we all expect qualification on pure merit in year 2-. Maybe they weren't the sponsors we were chasing in the first place. We want sponsors who think an alliance with a team will give them increased exposure in the long run. (I do Geox is actually one of those).

If Geox is in a huff when the chances are they are still present on the majority of events that they would have circled when they "committed", simply because one single year might be bit below the "it would be ideal for us if..." line, well..... cry me a river.

I expect there is some political undertone to that statement by Geox, with eyes on the application for 2012, and to contract some helpful pressure from the UCI for nudging the races that hand out wild cards in the "UCI" preferred direction.

 

[Mellow Velo]

The reason why it was so wrong to catapult teams into the PT with no track record, regardless who they sign up. It creates a model, even encourages a model, that is unsustainable. So you disrupt the model that did breed continuity, and inject upheaval only to let that implode too. Indeed Melo. Genius.

On the flip-side, in the longer run it also hurts the sport if sponsors who cause huge disruptions for other teams, by cherry picking big names and expect that that buys a "new" team a ticket, can't even muster the patience to take one year of wild cards on the chin -when we all expect qualification on pure merit in year 2-. Maybe they weren't the sponsors we were chasing in the first place. We want sponsors who think an alliance with a team will give them increased exposure in the long run. (I do Geox is actually one of those).

Indeed.
Geox may be the first team sponsor to pull out, having failed to secure the requisite access to global exposure, but there are a number of "fast track" teams out there who could easily have suffered the same fate.

Develop a selection process that supports instant, big budget buy ins and you are in effect holding yourself to ransom.
That is the situation now facing the UCI.

Rider security seems to have gone out of the window.

As for Team Geox-TMC, the question must be asked. If the financial guarantees were in place with the UCI to allow them to seek PT status, how is it that the team is now facing this financial ruin?

 

[tgsgirl]

It's hard to hate someone who's mostly invisible

Not if ACF brings him up as the winner for every race where Cadel isn't riding.

 

[Francois the Postman]

As for Team Geox-TMC, the question must be asked. If the financial guarantees were in place with the UCI to allow them to seek PT status, how is it that the team is now facing this financial ruin?

What is required? Guarantees in place that have legal status if a PT license is awarded or guarantees in place regardless if a PT license is awarded or not? I somehow assumed it was the former.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Well, ACF, when people attacked your potential BMC Giro lineup, one of the teams you mentioned in your indignant protest about who the other teams were sending was Movistar.

Now, I would argue that Movistar would send a stronger lineup than the BMC lineup you sent anyway - but now that it appears likely that they sign Franco Pellizotti, you're looking at a team with 3 former Giro podium riders (Arroyo and Bruseghin being the other two).

And with Euskaltel likely to go - and apparently sending Antón - they ought to be struck from the list too...

 

[Timmy-loves-Rabo]

if the Pellizotti rumor is true (confirmed?) then you gotta put him up there with the favorites for the giro, especially with the domestique talent movistar has.

 

[auscyclefan94]

Well, ACF, when people attacked your potential BMC Giro lineup, one of the teams you mentioned in your indignant protest about who the other teams were sending was Movistar.

Now, I would argue that Movistar would send a stronger lineup than the BMC lineup you sent anyway - but now that it appears likely that they sign Franco Pellizotti, you're looking at a team with 3 former Giro podium riders (Arroyo and Bruseghin being the other two).

And with Euskaltel likely to go - and apparently sending Antón - they ought to be struck from the list too...

Easy to say that about Movistar now. Didn't know that back then.

 

[auscyclefan94]

if the Pellizotti rumor is true (confirmed?) then you gotta put him up there with the favorites for the giro, especially with the domestique talent movistar has.

I'd imagine that they would want to get as much racing into him as possible. Personally I think he should do il giro as a domestique and target the veulta.

 

[Matthijs]

I'd imagine that they would want to get as much racing into him as possible. Personally I think he should do il giro as a domestique and target the veulta.

Tactically that would be a great idea. But however, they have no other real leader and Pellizotti definitely wants to target the Giro (and their sponsor too if they have any interest outside spain). So I think Franco will target the Giro, maybe fail or 'just' top 5 and then come back at the Vuelta to podium?
If Movistar contracts him, they should make him their GT captain of at least 2 GT's. They have good domestiques, but not so much winners. Which is not so surprising: they all left because Valverde can win everything and so was captain in every race he entered.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Easy to say that about Movistar now. Didn't know that back then.

But they still had Arroyo and Bruseghin then. And yes, Arroyo's podium was a semi-fluke (he had two top 10s before, 2007 and 2009 after di Luca's removal) and Bruseghin is on the way down at his age... but still a more useful lineup than your projected BMC one, easily.