micron said:
The GTs tried to breakaway last season but the riders sided with the UCI. This is the perfect opportunity for the GTs to set up their own competition - and since between the organisers of the big 3 they own all the other decent races as well, including the monuments, what would the UCI's PT be left with? The Eindhoven TTT and the farce that is the Eneco Tour. Now, which would you rather be watching?
Agree completely. I'd much rather see a league set up by the GT organizers, people who have a vested interest in promoting cycling. No interest in cycling = no money from their GTs. It would be much more similar to pro leagues such as the NFL, NBA, etc.. Sure there are some downsides (possibly) but many more benefits:
1. Standardized licensing and rules. Certain teams are allowed in. Their riders must meet certain guidelines to include dope control. No more reliance on individual country licensing and anti-doping authority. Again, how strict is licensing and dope control in Kazakhstan or Russia? They could institute a model similar to the French and make it universal.
2. Reduction of beauracratic influence. As a private, profit oriented company, individuals who are incompetent and possbily corrupt should be easier to fire (theoretically).
3. Teams comprise the league and have a great amount of input into decisions. Fiascos like the current Basso/Disco signing would not be allowed under a league like the NFL. The league either clears or does not clear him for racing. He can't go from one team to the other when he remains under a cloud of suspcion.
4. Salary cap? Don't know if this is a good thing or not, but could certainly be an option.
The organizers of the Tour of California may even be able to join and depart from the UCI. I personally see a lot of benefits to a pro "league" type of system.
)
