Racer Ex 

The UCI points system is idiotic.

Oh, you got Eli Manning through free agency? Here's your Superbowl Trophy.

"The Yankees will not be playing Babe Ruth down the pennant stretch because he's leaving for the Red Sox next year and they don't want him hitting home runs"

If I was Radio Shack I'd be on the phone right now:

"Johan, did you get our latest check?"

"No, not yet"

"Guess why?"

Bacciagalupe

Y'know, I don't think the problem here is the UCI Points System.

The problem is that Radio Shack has publicly and messily exploded.

Racer Ex 

Disagree on the former.

Totally agree on the latter.

This is just a high profile example of teams sitting a rider when they know they are leaving. Happens all the time and for a sport where you're one accident or illness away from the scrap heap, I think it's horrible for the riders. Ditto that we may not get to see the best riders showcasing their talent.

As far as RSNT holy smokes, it's bad. Last year I was pretty appalled at Leopard...that Abandy didn't bother to pre ride the Grenoble TT was an appalling lack of professionalism. I wasn't totally surprised at Johan not being able to right the ship; he's old school and while a very good DS he ran on fear and veteran riders who liked the bonus money.

When Fabian went down they lost the foundation; he lead by example. What they were left with was casserole tossed in a blender. Nice parts, but an ugly puree.

luxroadie

Points system isn't the whole issue - transfers and the points system is. Transfers in Cycling don't work right. Ask Sean Kelly who has put tons of energy, time and money into developing new riders who get poached for bigger salaries by better funded teams just as they come into their element.

Disagree? Then tell me how an outfit like HTC folds after the run they had. Poachers.

To the point, Points should only stay with the team they were won on - and only if the rider stays. That way a DS can't poach away and get a ProTour bearth (you can't buy your way in like you were Cycling's answer to Steinbrenner!!!).

But also riders would have a compelling reason to stay with a team - who would be more inclined to pay to keep a rider with results. Better longevity for the riders.

As for riders - longevity is what they need (and mostly what they want). They can't want money because the economics of the sport are such that there isn't money.

And as for the silly comment RacerEx, Radioshack doesn't pay Johan. They don't pay anyone. They sponsor the team which is owned by Flavio Becca (a Lux 'business man' who had a number of good and not so good background stories). Flavio pays the riders and DS's. Late paychecks are Flavio's issue.

Now RadioShack may be holding back cashflow, but the team is required to have financial means to run the season and pay the riders. That is part of every team's annual application/certification process. Radioshack is falling a part because Leopard was already a mess prior to the merger. The rest is drama that stems from the root cause.

Racer Ex 

There is no "transfer system", and under the current structure there can't be one put into place. The riders are independent contractors, nothing more, without any collective bargaining contract like the ones that exist in other professional sports that allow some regulation of movement. To their credit the UCI does require things like minimum salaries and some minimum financial guaranties to play at the different levels, but they have no legal standing to govern the movement between the contractor and employer.

As you pointed out the current points system allows folks to buy their way into the Pro Tour by poaching riders that were developed and allowed to flourish elsewhere. I'm in full agreement that the points should stay with the team. That was the part where I noted that the current system is idiotic.

In HTC's case the loss of Cavendish was the biggest nail in the coffin, but Sky weren't after him because of the points, they were after him because he was the highest profile British rider in the world. To Cav's credit he honored his contract, unlike Wiggans, and waited till it expired before negotiating a new deal elsewhere.

Had they been able to secure a sponsor, HTC would have had plenty of PT points to keep their ProTour status even without Cavendish. While I'd like to blame all of cycling's problems on the UCI, I have to blame that one on economics.

It was an ROI (return on investment) joke. RS writes a check to whatever subsidiary(s) run the team for the naming rights, with certain expectations for advertising exposure. By not allowing Fuglsang (or pick a rider) to ride, they are likely diminishing Radio Shack's ROI; certainly he was pegged as a possible leader at the Vuelta or a possible stage winner or dark horse for a GC slot at the TDF.

Can't think of another sport where the system encourages management not to "play" their best athletes. Not a great selling point when you're pitching a potential sponsor.

I don't think either of us is privy to the financial interests of RSNT; Becca's stated that he just took over sponsors while the RS principles have stated that this was a merger. The latter seems more likely.

chasm54

I confess that I no longer understand either the UCI points system or the economics of financing a pro team. But it does seem to me that the structure of the sport needs looking at. Road racing is more international than it has ever been, leading riders are emerging from various parts of the globe, there ought to be more TV revenue, and more sponsorship, than ever before. Yet that potential does not seem to be resulting in more stable, thriving world tour teams.

Bacciagalupe

Teams poach riders constantly, and would do so even in the absence of a points system. That's pretty much how you build a team.

Similarly, if RSN was going to punish Fuglsang for criticizing the team, that would happen in the absence of a points system.

HTC folded because they couldn't find a sponsor after an extended search -- something that almost certainly had nothing to do with UCI points.


If points stay with the rider, the teams get screwed. If points stay with the teams, the individual riders get screwed.


What professional sport guarantees "longevity?" What team sport doesn't have the option to trade players, or demote/fire them for poor performance?

HardyWeinberg

Bloomberg story in today's paper blames it all on Amaury Sport:

https://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm...urbloom01.html