Armstrong - AP Male Athlete of the Year

[Richard Adams]

<http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28998-2004Dec27.html>

 

[BIKE BUM]

ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZz

 

[psycholist]

"Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28998-2004Dec27.html>
>
>

Over the weekend I was watching a program on ESPN where they were counting
down the top 25 teams of the last 25 years. I thought it was pretty weird
that they can have Lance Armstrong as their athlete of the year (I know the
OP is about AP and not SI), but that US Postal doesn't even make the top 25
teams list. I guess I should be in awe at the votes Lance gets for such
awards. To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
a team sport is asking too much.

Bob C.

 

[TritonRider]

> To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
>a team sport is asking too much.
>
>Bob C.

Especially when all the hype was, and is about Lance and not the team.
Unfortunately the press tries to make it about "stars" because that's simple to
explain to quarter-wits who might get it.
Bill C

 

[gds]

psycholist wrote:
> "Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
> a team sport is asking too much.
>
> Bob C.
But it is no different than with other team sports. Do you know any
offensive tackles that get the same press as the quarterback? Can you
name the point guards and centers on each of the Bulls championship
teams tht also had a guy named Michael Jordan?

 

[k.papai]

Anonymous Coward,
Some people do train more than you and actually do it without doping.
He deserved the (American) AP Athlete of the Year.

-Ken

 

[psycholist]

"gds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> psycholist wrote:
>> "Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
> To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
>> a team sport is asking too much.
>>
>> Bob C.
> But it is no different than with other team sports. Do you know any
> offensive tackles that get the same press as the quarterback? Can you
> name the point guards and centers on each of the Bulls championship
> teams tht also had a guy named Michael Jordan?
>

I don't think the Bulls offense had a classic "point" guard. Often times,
Scottie Pippen as small forward would bring the ball up the court and
initiate the triangle offense. But some of the other guards were Hodges,
Paxson, Kerr, Armstrong, etc. Aside from Bill Cartwright, there was Will ?
(Perdue?) and Bill Wennington, etc. Sometimes Rainbowhead would do a stint
at center.

Anyway, the ESPN program I watched managed to acknowledge lots of teams
without naming all the individuals.
--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

 

[gds]

psycholist wrote:
> "gds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > psycholist wrote:
> >> "Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >> news:[email protected]...
> > To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
> >> a team sport is asking too much.
> >>
> >> Bob C.
> > But it is no different than with other team sports. Do you know any
> > offensive tackles that get the same press as the quarterback? Can
you
> > name the point guards and centers on each of the Bulls championship
> > teams tht also had a guy named Michael Jordan?
> >
>
> I don't think the Bulls offense had a classic "point" guard. Often
times,
> Scottie Pippen as small forward would bring the ball up the court and

> initiate the triangle offense. But some of the other guards were
Hodges,
> Paxson, Kerr, Armstrong, etc. Aside from Bill Cartwright, there was
Will ?
> (Perdue?) and Bill Wennington, etc. Sometimes Rainbowhead would do a
stint
> at center.
>
> Anyway, the ESPN program I watched managed to acknowledge lots of
teams
> without naming all the individuals.
> --
> Bob C.
>
> "Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
> T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)


Fair enough! And most cycling fans can name (most) of the Posties. But
my point is tht the "star" gets the press in almost every team sport
and the supporting cast is viewed as just that. No matter that no Q
back could survive a game without a line. Usually it is the Q who gets
the press. So, why be surprised that it's Lance? I actually think that
the OLN coverage while lacking on several fronts did a very good job of
explaining the importance of team. But the public wants heros and heros
are individuals.

 

[psycholist]

"gds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> psycholist wrote:
>> "gds" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>> > psycholist wrote:
>> >> "Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >> news:[email protected]...
>> > To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
>> >> a team sport is asking too much.
>> >>
>> >> Bob C.
>> > But it is no different than with other team sports. Do you know any
>> > offensive tackles that get the same press as the quarterback? Can
> you
>> > name the point guards and centers on each of the Bulls championship
>> > teams tht also had a guy named Michael Jordan?
>> >
>>
>> I don't think the Bulls offense had a classic "point" guard. Often
> times,
>> Scottie Pippen as small forward would bring the ball up the court and
>
>> initiate the triangle offense. But some of the other guards were
> Hodges,
>> Paxson, Kerr, Armstrong, etc. Aside from Bill Cartwright, there was
> Will ?
>> (Perdue?) and Bill Wennington, etc. Sometimes Rainbowhead would do a
> stint
>> at center.
>>
>> Anyway, the ESPN program I watched managed to acknowledge lots of
> teams
>> without naming all the individuals.
>> --
>> Bob C.
>>
>> "Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
>> T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)
>
>
> Fair enough! And most cycling fans can name (most) of the Posties. But
> my point is tht the "star" gets the press in almost every team sport
> and the supporting cast is viewed as just that. No matter that no Q
> back could survive a game without a line. Usually it is the Q who gets
> the press. So, why be surprised that it's Lance? I actually think that
> the OLN coverage while lacking on several fronts did a very good job of
> explaining the importance of team. But the public wants heros and heros
> are individuals.
>

And what has any of this to do with the post I made to which you originally
responded? I was commenting that, as long as ESPN was recognizing top TEAMS
of the past 25 years, why not recognize the US Postal Service TEAM? As a
matter of fact, they DID recognize the Bulls (#2), despite the fact that
Scottie, Horace, Pax and all the others were relegated in the public eye to
mere "supporting cast" members.

--
Bob C.

"Of course it hurts. The trick is not minding that it hurts."
T. E. Lawrence (of Arabia)

 

[Tim Lines]

gds wrote:
> psycholist wrote:
>
>>"Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>news:[email protected]...
>
> To expect the American public to actually understand how cycling is
>
>>a team sport is asking too much.
>>
>>Bob C.
>
> But it is no different than with other team sports. Do you know any
> offensive tackles that get the same press as the quarterback? Can you
> name the point guards and centers on each of the Bulls championship
> teams tht also had a guy named Michael Jordan?
>
The difference is that Michael Jordan never won the NBA Championship.
The Chicago Bulls won the NBA Championship.

USPS never won the TdF, LA did.

 

[TritonRider]

>From: "psycholist" [email protected]

>And what has any of this to do with the post I made to which you originally
>responded? I was commenting that, as long as ESPN was recognizing top TEAMS
>of the past 25 years, why not recognize the US Postal Service TEAM? As a
>matter of fact, they DID recognize the Bulls (#2), despite the fact that
>Scottie, Horace, Pax and all the others were relegated in the public eye to
>mere "supporting cast" members.
>
>--
>Bob C.
>

Peopla at least have some idea that teamates are needed to win in the big 4, or
5 if you soccer here. Where I think they sse cycling as an individual sport
since the teamates roles are not made clear and simple.
Bill C

 

[Sierraman]

"Richard Adams" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A28998-2004Dec27.html>

Heres Frankie Andreu's Final Column if you haven't seen it.

http://www.uspsprocycling.com/featurefile/fa_2004dec19.htm

 

[BIKE BUM]

My ccoment was not about deserving --Point is -- who really cares who
the AP names? -- just not very interesting -- Lance gets to be boring
subject after a while -- and no matter from what sport the AP chooses,
its not really interesting, everyone forgets tomorrow -- BTW, I am a
Lance fan overall.

Not sure how expressing my opinion regardingthe irrelevant and boring
nature of this award has anything to do with whether or not I am doper
(I'm not-- I don't think that will help my profession (not cycling)) or
how much I train (I certainly hope pros train more than a weekend
warrior).

 

[gds]

TritonRider wrote:
> >From: "psycholist" [email protected]
>
> >And what has any of this to do with the post I made to which you
originally
> >responded? I was commenting that, as long as ESPN was recognizing
top TEAMS
> >of the past 25 years, why not recognize the US Postal Service TEAM?
As a
> >matter of fact, they DID recognize the Bulls (#2), despite the fact
that
> >Scottie, Horace, Pax and all the others were relegated in the public
eye to
> >mere "supporting cast" members.
> >
> >--
> >Bob C.
> >
>
> Peopla at least have some idea that teamates are needed to win in the
big 4, or
> 5 if you soccer here. Where I think they sse cycling as an individual
sport
> since the teamates roles are not made clear and simple.
> Bill C

Yes! Whjile clearly a good support team for Lance finishing second as
teamis not the same as winning 3 championships in a row. So, I would ay
the USP was a great supporting team but not a great Team in terms of
winning as a team.

 

[Curtis L. Russell]

On 28 Dec 2004 07:31:40 -0800, "gds" <[email protected]> wrote:

>Yes! Whjile clearly a good support team for Lance finishing second as
>teamis not the same as winning 3 championships in a row. So, I would ay
>the USP was a great supporting team but not a great Team in terms of
>winning as a team.

That makes it sound as if T-Mobile wouln't have given up about ten
places in the team standings to have Kloden or Ullrich on the top step
of the podium in Paris. The team in first place in the team standings
has won a consolation prize, nice nowadays to put somewhere on the web
site.

Sometimes the reason(s) they win the team competition is/ are why they
didn't take the individual honors - things like supporting too many
efforts, not picking a single team leader, all finishing in a group
together on a decisive stage, three or four minutes down on the
leader. A strong squad with a DS determined to wait for destiny to
make his decisions for him, rather than his team making the race, can
win the team title year after year, if all the leaders don't decide to
quit first.

A great team needs to be racing as a team for something worthwhile.
First in the Tour is such a prize. First team in the Tour isn't...

Curtis L. Russell
Odenton, MD (USA)
Just someone on two wheels...

 

[gds]

Curtis L. Russell wrote:
> On 28 Dec 2004 07:31:40 -0800, "gds" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Yes! Whjile clearly a good support team for Lance finishing second
as
> >teamis not the same as winning 3 championships in a row. So, I would
ay
> >the USP was a great supporting team but not a great Team in terms of
> >winning as a team.
>
> That makes it sound as if T-Mobile wouln't have given up about ten
> places in the team standings to have Kloden or Ullrich on the top
step
> of the podium in Paris. The team in first place in the team standings
> has won a consolation prize, nice nowadays to put somewhere on the
web
> site.
>
> Sometimes the reason(s) they win the team competition is/ are why
they
> didn't take the individual honors - things like supporting too many
> efforts, not picking a single team leader, all finishing in a group
> together on a decisive stage, three or four minutes down on the
> leader. A strong squad with a DS determined to wait for destiny to
> make his decisions for him, rather than his team making the race, can
> win the team title year after year, if all the leaders don't decide
to
> quit first.
>
> A great team needs to be racing as a team for something worthwhile.
> First in the Tour is such a prize. First team in the Tour isn't...
>
> Curtis L. Russell
> Odenton, MD (USA)
> Just someone on two wheels...

I agree with all of your arguments-but not the conclusion. The team did
a great job by supporting LA -the indivdual winner. But by your own
argument the actual winning team would have forgone that to have the
individual winner come from their team. Isn't this somehow very
different from a great team being a great winning team. It seems your
argument runs that cycling involves a team "effort" to support an
individual which is a bit different from being a team sport where the
purpose is for the team itself to win and the individual(s) supports
that goal.
So, I don't have a problem with ESPN or anyone else not "recognizing"
USPS as a great team.

 

[BIKE BUM]

Hey Ken,

Sorenstam chosen AP Female Athlete of the Year!!!

Isn't that exciting....

Let's debate whether she "deserved it" -- I bet she plays more golf
then me, but I ride more. Hmmm I wonder what her handicap to LT ratio
is compared to mine.

 

[k.papai]

I don't consider golfers "athletes" in a truest sense of the word.

Golfers are sportsmen or gamesmen but athletes? No. (this is an
ancient RBR debate you know, since you're an RBR rookie, I need to tell
you)

Not that exciting. Annika S.

I think one of the top pro Russian female tennis players should have
won Female Athlete of the Year.

Just sayin',
KJP

 

[BIKE BUM]

Now a debate on the merits of golf may be another matter; and I am
always willing to discuss Anna K andother tennis hotties.


As for an RBR rookie -- no (but have not posted previously under this
name or recently for that matter - I've been competing since the late
80's (Cat. 2) and have lurked on this board for 5-6 yrs).

Golf: How can you demand respect for cycling as a sport (viewed by many
as not or atleast trivial) -- Kind of like your jogging before you took
up cycling-- and demean the sport of golf. I'm a golfer and I can tell
you that after playing in the hot sun carrying a bag and walking a
course -- you are tired and the hitting a golf shot requires strength,
dexterity and eye-hand coordination. BTW all sports do not need to be
purely aerobic in nature.

Tennis v. Golf hotties: Tennis wins hands down; Most women golf pros
are beastly and not interested in you parking the car in their garage
("Not that there is anything wrong with that" --Jerry S. -- just not my
deal). Anna K and a high percentage of the other women tennis pros are
just plain hot (my deal).

Ok now before I get the hate male from the women -- its just an
observation -- but to further dig a hole-- i find that women cycling
pros tend to be a lot hotter (T-mobile) than the women amateur
cyclists (your group ride), and yes there are exceptions (which prove
the rule) -- and no that does not mean that if you are an amateur
cyclist that your not hot or that your ugly or that your a lseer human
being, just probably likely to be less hot then your average pro.

 

[Wayne Pein]

It should have been swimmer Michael Phelps. Multiple world records and
gold medals.

Wayne