Two Time trial Questions
 

1) Why is there no team trial? (I love watching the fluid motion of a team time trial)

2) Would a second Individual TT make this race more competitive?

The feeling is that the team time trial has too much influence on the outcome of the race. A top team has a bad day and it really influences the individual effort of a GC contender.

As far as the ITT, something different I suppose.

TTT is an occasional event, it's not mandatory. Even when they do it, they try to keep it short because time gaps can be huge otherwise. There's always a Spanish or Italian team who's absolutely terrible at it, and it ruins at least one GC contender.

You wouldn't be asking about a more competitive race if Froome was putting 5+ minutes into all the other gc contenders over 80kms. I think they had too many years of Lemond, Indurain, Ullrich, Wiggins and (sometimes) Lance only winning TT stages on the way to the the Champs Elysees, so the race is definitely more set up for climbers these days.

The organizers didn't mind long time trials when they had Hinault and Anquetil. The 1979 Tour had 5 ITT's for 165Km ans another 2 TTT's for 177Km, Thats almost 210 miles of time trialing.

If they did that now you could bet Sky would have brought Wiggins. Froome could win by half an hour.

Watching TT's is like watching paint dry but I think 1 is silly...two seems a good number...on of them flat, the other hilly.

And Garmin wouldn't have dared leave out Millar.

They used to regularly have 80km+ TTs. Indurain caught Fignon for 6 minutes over 65km in '92.