Winless teams

[L'arriviste]

Hahahaha, oh wow. That name just makes me happy thinking about it, but no idea if theyll win a race this season idd .

Huub Duyn got them some good airtime yesterday. He was hanging onto the peloton for dear life for quite a few kms, thereby always appearing on the "Achteraan peloton" shots. Must have been taking tips from Thomas Voeckler.

 

[Havetts]

Its all strategy . Jelly Belly, wow - what a great name for a sponsor.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

Please refrain from posting the sign "®" behind LEOPARD TREK, as it sends the message of LEOPARD TREK being a commercial team with the goal of making financial profits. May I remind you that this is not the case, since LEOPARD TREK clearly defines its goal to be "true racing". You may post the sign "®" when you speak of the company TREK.

It is Leopard (the cycling team) + Trek® (the cycling company. Ergo I am semantically correct.

Since you are a linguist, I was other the impression you would appreciate clarification as on how to pronounce and spell a certain name. This way, you don't have to lecture us about how to pronounce it, as it happened with Movistar for example.

I don't actually mind them asking us to pronounce Leopard as it is in Lëtzebuergesch. But there is no linguistic reason for the all caps. That's just stupid.

My point is, since we were clearly instructed on how to spell and pronounce it, why not use the correct spelling and pronounciation? Again, you being a linguist, I assume you know how in Spanish for example, simply forgetting an accent can constitute a serious grammatical error and change the meaning of the word. We could all just stop using correct spelling altogether "and descend into anarchy", as they say on The Big Bang Theory. "We could also stop using the letter "M", but to be honest I think that would be isslead and oronic".

What change in pronunciation does the all caps create? I know how changing an accent can change language (eg schon "already" vs. schön "beautiful"), but there is no linguistic change between the lower case and the upper case in Lëtzebuergesch (the language of Leopard) or English (the language of Trek), ergo it's just folly. Unless we're supposed to shout out loud every time we mention them.

As I say, I don't actually mind the 'lay-o-pard' thing. Doesn't bother me, they're a Lëtzebuergesch team so the Lëtzebuergesch pronunciation makes sense. I can see why they want that. I can even see why they insist on no hyphen because of the 'partnership' nature of the team. I can't see why they insist on all caps instead of "Leopard Trek", unless it's to say "LOOK AT US! OUR NAME IS BIG AND SPECTACULAR AND STANDS OUT AMONG THIS ENTRY LIST!"

 

[Christian]

It is Leopard (the cycling team) + Trek® (the cycling company. Ergo I am semantically correct.

I still think you are wrong here. It's Leopard True Cycling (the company) and Trek (the company). Together they form LEOPARD TREK (the cycling team).

I can't see why they insist on all caps instead of "Leopard Trek"

It is indeed a bit of a "headscratcher", as you would call it. I can offer one possible explanation: you'll notice that TREK is always in all capital letters in their logo(*). Maybe that is their officially registered trademark or something like that. Therefore they wanted it capitalized in the name of the team as well. However it'd look a bit weird to write it Leopard TREK, so they decided to capitalize it all. Also notice how the official memo came from Trek, the company (at least if I remember correctly), and not the team. On the other hand, you'll find the spelling "Trek" many times on the company's website.

I actually don't care how people write it, I hope you know that my comment on the registered TM sign above was an attempt at parodying the lingo of the memo. I'm not asking you to like it, to understand it or to do it, I'm just asking that you accept my decision to follow the official spelling. By the way it takes a fraction of a second to hit/un-hit the caps lock button

*Here the official logo (with the (R) sign):

 

[Barrus]

My gut is saying Astana, my hope is Leotard trek. Due to the same reason as sky and radioshack last year, any first year time should not have a protour license, and because Leotard has done their business in a manner that should not have been done

 

[Christian]

Leotard has done their business in a manner that should not have been done

Sorry but I have to ask what you mean ... feel free to answer in a PM if you don't want to go off topic

 

[Cobblestoned]

Voted for Euskaltel, because they will have to wait till its warmer.
Koldo and Samy have to heat up first.

All other teams have more, better and earlier options.

Business is good for pro-cycling because its essential.
Pro cycling lives from business and business is getting harder.
Better hard business than no business.

 

[Barrus]

Sorry but I have to ask what you mean ... feel free to answer in a PM if you don't want to go off topic

Discussing contracts with riders on a previous team, while the manager was still being employed by this team. And quite a few other aspects as well, for example the manner in which Cancellara left Saxo, the manner in which the Schlecks behaved in the last moments with Saxo

 

[jaylew]

Koldo and Samy have to heat up first.

Koldo is going to have to recover from his broken clavicle and wrist first. Really, it's one of the main reasons I voted for them, considering the other two riders most likely to get a win will either have to do so against stiff competition at P-N or against AC.

 

[Cobblestoned]

Koldo is going to have to recover from his broken clavicle and wrist first. Really, it's one of the main reasons I voted for them, considering the other two riders most likely to get a win will either have to do so against stiff competition at P-N or against AC.

When did that happen to Koldo ?

 

[Christian]

Discussing contracts with riders on a previous team, while the manager was still being employed by this team. And quite a few other aspects as well, for example the manner in which Cancellara left Saxo, the manner in which the Schlecks behaved in the last moments with Saxo

I don't know if they were already "discussing contracts" while Andersen was still on Saxo Bank. For me it was more of a matter of a lot of employees facing a very uncertain future (let's not forget Riis had no sponsorship in place until he pulled of the Contador deal, so late in or even after the Tour de France), who decided to take a different offer. Andersen's rule is indeed a bit dubious but again I see it more as the employee deciding to start his own business next year, rather than high treason or espionage or something like that.

The manner in which Cancellara left Saxo Bank was entirely his decision, as we know now. The Maca Loca 1.83 M. € deal was apparently all made up. He wanted to leave because he was unhappy at Saxo Bank, but I don't think he was lured any more by LEOPARD TREK than he was lured by Team Sky or BMC. Would you dislike Team Sky or BMC, had he decided to go there? In other words, is it fair to dislike a whole team based on the actions of one of their riders?

The same question holds true to the Schlecks' late season behaviour. First off, I think you can only really reproach Andy bad behaviour, because Fränk's Vuelta was quite decent (I'd even go so far as to call it very good) considering the fact he'd just gotten collarbone surgery and basically hadn't ridden a race since stage 4 in the Tour de France.

As for beergate, I think it has been discussed more than enough on here ... but again, is it fair to dislike and wish failure upon a whole team based on the actions of two of their riders? Would you dislike Cofidis, if they'd signed O'Grady?

 

[Barrus]

I don't know if they were already "discussing contracts" while Andersen was still on Saxo Bank. For me it was more of a matter of a lot of employees facing a very uncertain future (let's not forget Riis had no sponsorship in place until he pulled of the Contador deal, so late in or even after the Tour de France), who decided to take a different offer. Andersen's rule is indeed a bit dubious but again I see it more as the employee deciding to start his own business next year, rather than high treason or espionage or something like that.

The manner in which Cancellara left Saxo Bank was entirely his decision, as we know now. The Maca Loca 1.83 M. € deal was apparently all made up. He wanted to leave because he was unhappy at Saxo Bank, but I don't think he was lured any more by LEOPARD TREK than he was lured by Team Sky or BMC. Would you dislike Team Sky or BMC, had he decided to go there? In other words, is it fair to dislike a whole team based on the actions of one of their riders?

The same question holds true to the Schlecks' late season behaviour. First off, I think you can only really reproach Andy bad behaviour, because Fränk's Vuelta was quite decent (I'd even go so far as to call it very good) considering the fact he'd just gotten collarbone surgery and basically hadn't ridden a race since stage 4 in the Tour de France.

As for beergate, I think it has been discussed more than enough on here ... but again, is it fair to dislike and wish failure upon a whole team based on the actions of two of their riders? Would you dislike Cofidis, if they'd signed O'Grady?

Concerning the Andersen, wasn't he already busy the entire year creating the new team? Also I think it is quite clear that he was already discussing contracts or at least who would come with him since the conception of the idea, or else he would never have found sponsors.

Also it was quite clear that Cancellara would go to Leotard because he was great friends with the Schlecks and most people on this team.

The difference though is that those riders are the reason that the team was created and are the posterchilds of this team

 

[jaylew]

It is indeed a bit of a "headscratcher", as you would call it. I can offer one possible explanation: you'll notice that TREK is always in all capital letters in their logo(*). Maybe that is their officially registered trademark or something like that. Therefore they wanted it capitalized in the name of the team as well. However it'd look a bit weird to write it Leopard TREK, so they decided to capitalize it all. Also notice how the official memo came from Trek, the company (at least if I remember correctly), and not the team. On the other hand, you'll find the spelling "Trek" many times on the company's website.

I'm just not buying it. Like you say, they use "Trek" all the time in their materials. You have to admit it seems really pompous to make everyone capitalize that whole name, though honestly I've very rarely seen a media outlet, race site, or individual actually getting it right. It seems like the few times I've seen it capitalized, it's been because every team has been capitalized and they've either added a hyphen or "TEAM" in front anyway.

 

[jaylew]

When did that happen to Koldo ?

4th stage of Ruta del Sol. There was a bad crash in the sprint finish.

 

[Granville57]

I'm not sure if we're supposed to be voting with our hearts or minds.
I voted Treck-let, not because I necessarily believe they'll be last on the list, but because I do believe that if they start climbing the podium on a regular basis, Andy and some others will become insufferable.

 

[Christian]

Concerning the Andersen, wasn't he already busy the entire year creating the new team?

Good question - many have speculated on it, but I can't answer it. My theory is that Marc Biver was the first one to work on it, then they fired him for lack of secrecy. That's when Nygaard took over, some time in April, after meeting with Becca in Kortrijk (he stated this in several interviews, not directly mentioning Biver's name however). I therefore believe Andersen got on board in May, and he was fired in mid-June (around the time of Nationals).

Also I think it is quite clear that he was already discussing contracts or at least who would come with him since the conception of the idea, or else he would never have found sponsors.

I honestly don't believe Andersen was in charge of finding sponsors or discussing contracts, it would be more likely for this to be Becca and Nygaard. Also the whole "finding sponsors" thing wasn't such a big problem, since it was the sponsor's idea to create the team in the first place. Also there is a big difference between "discussing contracts" and asking "would you be interested if ...". Fränk Schleck stated on Luxembourg TV (I can find you the link for the show but it's all in Luxembourgish), that they received contract offers during the Tour de Suisse (eg already after Andersen had been fired). By this time, Riis was not able to make them (and I assume, anyone) an offer. Also note that not one single rider extended his contract with Riis last year, Hoj even retired.

Also it was quite clear that Cancellara would go to Leotard because he was great friends with the Schlecks and most people on this team.

It was indeed the most logical option, but you can't deny that Sky and BMC didn't try everything they could to get him to join their respective team, BMC even wanted to create a whole signature FC bike series. I believe that it was really open for a while, even Andy stated once that he didn't believe FC would join the Luxembourg team.

The difference though is that those riders are the reason that the team was created and are the posterchilds of this team

Who do you mean by "those riders"? I assume Andy and Cancellara? If so, then I think you are only partially correct, because IMO the team was created because of Andy and Fränk, but not FC. Also note that the Team was already created before beergate - so either you already disliked Andy and Lux Project before the incident (which would be fine, but a little contradictory to what you stated earlier), or you expected them to drop Andy solely because of a night of heavy drinking, and by doing so, consequently end the whole project à la Pegasus.

Cancellara has indeed become a "posterchild" of the team, but again - is it fair to wish failure upon all the other riders, who had nothing to do with neither beer- nor contractgate? I for one think riders such as Wegmann, Wagner, Fuglsang and Monfort are simply really nice guys, and I'll wish them success regardless on which team they might be some day. It is the same with Radioshack - just because one dislikes Armstrong doesn't mean one can't enjoy Brajkovic's or Machado's wins

 

[Christian]

I'm just not buying it. Like you say, they use "Trek" all the time in their materials. You have to admit it seems really pompous to make everyone capitalize that whole name, though honestly I've very rarely seen a media outlet, race site, or individual actually getting it right. It seems like the few times I've seen it capitalized, it's been because every team has been capitalized and they've either added a hyphen or "TEAM" in front anyway.

To be honest I don't fervently defend my theory, as I said it is only one possible explanation. I also agree that almost no one (except me ) ever seems to follow the instructions. Even Luxembourgish media (basically LEOPARD TREK's propaganda outlet) doesn't do it.

Another possibility is to blame it on Trek, since they were the ones who sent out the memo.

 

[Libertine Seguros]

It was indeed the most logical option, but you can't deny that Sky and BMC didn't try everything they could to get him to join their respective team, BMC even wanted to create a whole signature FC bike series. I believe that it was really open for a while, even Andy stated once that he didn't believe FC would join the Luxembourg team.

No, I won't deny Sky and BMC did the same thing. But I didn't like it when they did it either, and part of the reason I don't like them is because they are prepared to do that.

Donc, I don't like it when Leopard True Racing Trek® do it, and I don't like them for doing it.

 

[Christian]

No, I won't deny Sky and BMC did the same thing. But I didn't like it when they did it either, and part of the reason I don't like them is because they are prepared to do that.

Donc, I don't like it when Leopard True Racing Trek® do it, and I don't like them for doing it.

You are consequent with your judgement and I respect you for it. I was only trying to see if there were double-standards hidden somewhere.
I also assume you don't wish failure on all riders of Teams Sky and BMC?

 

[Barrus]

Cancellara has indeed become a "posterchild" of the team, but again - is it fair to wish failure upon all the other riders, who had nothing to do with neither beer- nor contractgate? I for one think riders such as Wegmann, Wagner, Fuglsang and Monfort are simply really nice guys, and I'll wish them success regardless on which team they might be some day. It is the same with Radioshack - just because one dislikes Armstrong doesn't mean one can't enjoy Brajkovic's or Machado's wins

If they do well, it would validate the system which is introduced by teams such as Sky (in the lead-up to their creation) and Leotard-Trek and would validate the UCI system that gives first year teams a protour license and would validate unprofessional behaviour

 

[Libertine Seguros]

You are consequent with your judgement and I respect you for it. I was only trying to see if there were double-standards hidden somewhere.
I also assume you don't wish failure on all riders of Teams Sky and BMC?

I don't wish failure on all riders of Team Leopard True Cycling Trek® either. Fabian Wegmann, for example, is a rider I like a lot, and I'm glad he's had another chance at a good level team.

There are some riders I like on BMC and Team Sky too. BMC don't bother me all that much except when ACF is overhyping somebody on BMC and totally ignoring or putting down equally or more talented riders on other teams. Sky, on the other hand, I can't stand.

Team Sky, Leopard Trek, HTC, all teams I hope to see as little of as possible. Thankfully, cos I won't be able to tell their jerseys apart from a helicam, there will be just one race-ruining amorphous black-white blob on the front of the péloton.

 

[Christian]

If they do well, it would validate the system which is introduced by teams such as Sky (in the lead-up to their creation) and Leotard-Trek and would validate the UCI system that gives first year teams a protour license and would validate unprofessional behaviour

I think we came across the first-year ProTeam license issue before, and I partially agree with you. But on the other hand: new money and new sponsors are always welcome in cycling, and rules that are too strict might keep them away. Of course the controls must be strict, as Pegasus has shown, but if someone really wants a PT license and has the money and everything to back it up - why not accept it?

As for "unprofessional behaviour" - why does international football function just fine with the system of buying players out of their contract, but in cycling it's a deed of unspeakable evil? Or would it be time to reform some of these rules?

 

[Libertine Seguros]

I think we came across the first-year ProTeam license issue before, and I partially agree with you. But on the other hand: new money and new sponsors are always welcome in cycling, and rules that are too strict might keep them away. Of course the controls must be strict, as Pegasus has shown, but if someone really wants a PT license and has the money and everything to back it up - why not accept it?

So you throw the licences at these new big money teams. There's only so much room, so you alienate those sponsors who have put long term investments into the sport - FDJ, Lotto, Euskaltel, Lampre and so on. They can't compete money-wise. Just handing over PT licences to teams with money is a dangerous precedent to set as when the novelty wears off and those sponsors pull out you need that solid base of sponsors to keep everything afloat.

As for "unprofessional behaviour" - why does international football function just fine with the system of buying players out of their contract, but in cycling it's a deed of unspeakable evil? Or would it be time to reform some of these rules?

But it doesn't. Big football clubs run at millions and millions of euros of losses. The smaller teams are going into administration even in well-established top football nations like Spain, Italy and England. Because cycling doesn't have the privilege of charging, it is at the behest of the sponsors. It can't run at a huge loss, thus the 'throw money at the problem' football cure is not applicable in the long term in cycling.

And just because one sport is successful and morally bankrupt it doesn't mean every sport should be.

 

[Christian]

So you throw the licences at these new big money teams. There's only so much room, so you alienate those sponsors who have put long term investments into the sport - FDJ, Lotto, Euskaltel, Lampre and so on. They can't compete money-wise. Just handing over PT licences to teams with money is a dangerous precedent to set as when the novelty wears off and those sponsors pull out you need that solid base of sponsors to keep everything afloat.

I think cycling needs both - the big money teams and the traditional sponsors - otherwise the sport would stagnate. I like FDJ (and especially their jerseys) as much as the next guy, but the prospects of them ever significantly upping their budget are slim to none. And that is fine. Last year a smaller team (Milram) folded, and a big one stepped in. Next year RadioShack will fold and a small one such as FDJ might take their spot. Your defence of "the little guy" is honourable, but at the end of the day I think cycling needs the LEOPARDs, Katushas, Garmin-Cervélos and Astanas just as much as it needs the FDJ's and Skil Shimanos

Big football clubs run at millions and millions of euros of losses.

I don't think one can make a generalized statement like this. There certainly are cases like this, but there are also counter-examples. Bayern Munich for example generates big profits on the stock market.

And just because one sport is successful and morally bankrupt it doesn't mean every sport should be.

Since I am not much of a Clinic regular I am not familiar with your Clinic posting history, but I am sure many people there would readily admit that cycling is the most morally bankrupt of them all

 

[Andy99]

I don't wish failure on all riders of Team Leopard True Cycling Trek® either. Fabian Wegmann, for example, is a rider I like a lot, and I'm glad he's had another chance at a good level team.

There are some riders I like on BMC and Team Sky too. BMC don't bother me all that much except when ACF is overhyping somebody on BMC and totally ignoring or putting down equally or more talented riders on other teams. Sky, on the other hand, I can't stand.

Team Sky, Leopard Trek, HTC, all teams I hope to see as little of as possible. Thankfully, cos I won't be able to tell their jerseys apart from a helicam, there will be just one race-ruining amorphous black-white blob on the front of the péloton.

What about Garmin? They are the worst kit plagiarisers that there is. It's as if they want to be sky.