# Michael Rogers. Days numbered at SKY?



## 1stmh (Apr 7, 2007)

So given SKY's zero tolerance doping policy, how long till Rogers is the next one to leave. 

Reading the USADA transcripts, he is mentioned (by name, not as rider 1, or rider 2) by both Tyler Hamilton and Floyd Landis as attending training camps with the infamous Dr. Ferrari. And why would you work with Ferrari if you are not going to dope? That is what Ferrari is known for and or good at. Tyler Hamilton mentions this at length in his book too.

So how long till the truth comes out?


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

Cadel Evans worked with him too. People may be overreacting to this guy's name. He is a sports doctor and a coach (unlike the gynecologist, Fuentes). It is not inconceivable that he worked with athletes that did not request "all" of his services. I have not read Tyler's book so I do not know what exactly he implies. 

I have read the that Ferrari and Fuentes operate on Tenerife, where Astana, Sky and Garmin like to go for altitude training. Does that mean...?


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

I haven't read the book either. Just when did they work together? 

These days, Ferrari is the evil doctor behind #1 enemy Lance Armstrong. But it wasn't always that way. Ferrari was once well respected as a sports doc -- riders could go to him without raising suspicion.


----------



## 1stmh (Apr 7, 2007)

Hamilton's timeline for seeing Rogers at these training camps were 2000-2003. After that Hamilton's worked with Fuentes, after Riis introduced them.

True, it is not fact that Roger's doped. But Hamilton seems to imply that these training sessions where all about establishing baselines to develop doping practices and training programs. the two were intertwined. Embedded.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

I wonder when they will address Shane Sutton?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

davidka said:


> Cadel Evans worked with him too. People may be overreacting to this guy's name.* He is a sports doctor and a coach* (unlike the gynecologist, Fuentes). It is not inconceivable that he worked with athletes that did not request "all" of his services. I have not read Tyler's book so I do not know what exactly he implies.
> 
> I have read the that Ferrari and Fuentes operate on Tenerife, where Astana, Sky and Garmin like to go for altitude training. Does that mean...?


There's a long video of Lemond speaking (in France, I believe, around year 2005) to a forum of people. In the video, Lemond mentioned that when he once asked Ferrari about using a "trainer" in his coaching, and Ferrari replied that he didn't know what a trainer was. Lemond's reaction to Ferrari was (paraphrase): "Oh my gosh, how could anyone especially a coach not know what a trainer is." 

Video is on youtube.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

aclinjury said:


> There's a long video of Lemond speaking (in France, I believe, around year 2005) to a forum of people. In the video, Lemond mentioned that when he once asked Ferrari about using a "trainer" in his coaching, and Ferrari replied that he didn't know what a trainer was. Lemond's reaction to Ferrari was (paraphrase): "Oh my gosh, how could anyone especially a coach not know what a trainer is."
> 
> Video is on youtube.


Ferrari is Italian, maybe he has a different word for it. Not defending Ferrari but c'mon..


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

I wonder when SKY will implode because everyone is gone?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

davidka said:


> Ferrari is Italian, maybe he has a different word for it. Not defending Ferrari but c'mon..


I know plenty of Asian friends in Thailand and the Philippines, and a couple in Mexico, whose English level is that of 5th grade ESL, all of them cycling enthusiasts, but none has any problem when I used cycling jargons with them. Yes they know what a trainer is. You can't seriously be suggesting that a cycling coach (albeit an Italian one) doesn't know what a trainer is. Ferrari, coach he ain't. Dope, yes.


----------



## Doctor Falsetti (Sep 24, 2010)

Richard Virenque:



> "Teaming up with Ferrari was like putting a saucepan up your backside: it was immediately obvious what you were doing"


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Is this quote actually by Virenque or are you quoting from Willy Voet ? It doesn't sound like the kind of thing Virenque would have the balls or the intelligence to say himself...


----------



## roddjbrown (Jan 19, 2012)

Doctor Falsetti said:


> I wonder when they will address Shane Sutton?


I don't think they will. He's too embedded in the track team and they definitely won't want to touch that coaching setup. They'll try and sweep anything Sutton-related under a big rug in Manchester..


----------



## robdamanii (Feb 13, 2006)

How does one actually get a saucepan up one's backside? That has to take a lot of work.


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

It's a great sounding quote, which is why I was looking for what the French version of the expression would be, and I couldn't find it.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

aclinjury said:


> I know plenty of Asian friends in Thailand and the Philippines, and a couple in Mexico, whose English level is that of 5th grade ESL, all of them cycling enthusiasts, but none has any problem when I used cycling jargons with them. Yes they know what a trainer is. You can't seriously be suggesting that a cycling coach (albeit an Italian one) doesn't know what a trainer is. Ferrari, coach he ain't. Dope, yes.


Do you really believe that Ferrari doesn't know what a trainer is? Really? 
He was the most sought after trainer in the sport of cycling. He was not hired for his grasp of cycling jargon.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Quote:
Originally Posted by aclinjury 
I know plenty of Asian friends in Thailand and the Philippines, and a couple in Mexico, whose English level is that of 5th grade ESL, all of them cycling enthusiasts, but none has any problem when I used cycling jargons with them. Yes they know what a trainer is. You can't seriously be suggesting that a cycling coach (albeit an Italian one) doesn't know what a trainer is. Ferrari, coach he ain't. Dope, yes.



> Originally Posted by davidka
> Do you really believe that Ferrari doesn't know what a trainer is? Really?
> He was the most sought after trainer in the sport of cycling. He was not hired for his grasp of cycling jargon.


davidka, aclinjury agrees with you. He is giving an example of HIS friends who don't speak English but definitely know what a trainer is. He is saying that there is NO doubt that Ferrari knows exactly what a trainer is.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

metoou2 said:


> Quote:
> 
> davidka, aclinjury agrees with you. He is giving an example of HIS friends who don't speak English but definitely know what a trainer is. He is saying that there is NO doubt that Ferrari knows exactly what a trainer is.


bingo. You said it nicely. Maybe my English (not my 1st language) isn't getting thru. But anyway I have yet to meet any enthusiat cyclist (be it an English speaking one or non-English speaking one) who follows pro cycling and not know what a trainer is.

And I dont know whether Ferrari know it or not, but thru Lemond's account, Lemond said that Ferrari isn't a training coach because he has no clue how to use a trainer (the assumption from Lemond is that all serious pro cyclists use a trainer). In light of everthing that just happened, I think I'll believe Lemond.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Can someone put lemon's hearsay in context? 

Trainer = a person who trains cyclists
or
Trainer = indoor training device



And what exactly is that quote supposed to prove? We already know that Ferrari is the best doping doctor in the business. Love him or hate him, the guy knows what it takes to win. Does lemond want us to believe that ferrari is ignorant of training devices? Was lemond trying to sell ferrari a training device?


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Can someone put lemon's hearsay in context?
> 
> Trainer = a person who trains cyclists
> or
> ...


Here's what I recall from the video, and my impression of what Lemond was trying to say about Ferrari in that video.

He asked Ferrari if he used a trainer in his training program. Based on this questioning, we can infer that "trainer" in this case probably refers to a device and not a person. To this question, Ferrari said something like (according to Lemond) "What is a trainer?". Lemond said he was surprised by the response because either Ferrari really didn't know what a trainer was or he was trying to play dumb and was just dodging Lemond's question completel. And the inferrence I get from Lemond here is that if a coach/training is dodging a question about training methodology, then perhaps he isn't using any because he isn't a real trainer/coach. That is what I got from watching Lemond's sentiment for Ferriari in that video. It's on youtube in the public domain, anyone can watch and judge for himself.

Why do I feel like this debate is pretty much academic. People are going to debate if Ferrari was an actual trainer/coach? still??


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

metoou2 said:


> Quote:
> Originally Posted by aclinjury
> I know plenty of Asian friends in Thailand and the Philippines, and a couple in Mexico, whose English level is that of 5th grade ESL, all of them cycling enthusiasts, but none has any problem when I used cycling jargons with them. Yes they know what a trainer is. You can't seriously be suggesting that a cycling coach (albeit an Italian one) doesn't know what a trainer is. Ferrari, coach he ain't. Dope, yes.
> 
> ...


Which makes LA's claim that one of the "services" for which he paid a million bucks was "bike fitting" even more ludicrous, if the quack is claiming that he doesn't know what a trainer is. :lol:


----------



## 88 rex (Mar 18, 2008)

mpre53 said:


> Which makes LA's claim that one of the "services" for which he paid a million bucks was "bike fitting" even more ludicrous, if the quack is claiming that he doesn't know what a trainer is. :lol:


He didn't claim that. Lemond appparently claimed that, per ACL's interpretation of a yet to be seen youtube video.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> Here's what I recall from the video, and my impression of what Lemond was trying to say about Ferrari in that video.
> 
> He asked Ferrari if he used a trainer in his training program. Based on this questioning, we can infer that "trainer" in this case probably refers to a device and not a person. To this question, Ferrari said something like (according to Lemond) "What is a trainer?". Lemond said he was surprised by the response because either Ferrari really didn't know what a trainer was or he was trying to play dumb and was just dodging Lemond's question completel. And the inferrence I get from Lemond here is that if a coach/training is dodging a question about training methodology, then perhaps he isn't using any because he isn't a real trainer/coach. That is what I got from watching Lemond's sentiment for Ferriari in that video. It's on youtube in the public domain, anyone can watch and judge for himself.
> 
> Why do I feel like this debate is pretty much academic. People are going to debate if Ferrari was an actual trainer/coach? still??


Ferrari was a doctor, drug dealer, trainer, coach, etc. Of course he was a coach. Nobody is debating that. That's why Carmichael is getting so much heat. 

Do you have a link to Lemond's retelling of the story? Better yet would be the actual interaction between the two. That would give us context. Nobody in their right mind would think that Ferrari had never heard of the training device. So what should we think? 


Here's what I think: Much ado about nothing. 



As the word "trainer" has two meanings, maybe Ferrari was asking for clarification. If someone asks, "Do you use a trainer in your training program?" It's perfectly reasonable to ask, "What do you mean by 'trainer' [coach or device]?" before going into explanation on how the trainer is used. 

When one word has two meanings and it is used multiple times in a question, things can become confusing. "Do you use a trainer to train athletes on a trainer during your training program or do athletes use the trainer without a trainer?" 


*What is a better explanation: Ferrari had never heard of a trainer OR Ferrari was asking for clarification?*


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

None of you have seen this 3-yr old youtube video of Lemond giving this speech?
It's a little long and a bit boring but it's out there, but go watch it, and get it from Lemond yourself.

Greg LeMond - 'Cycling is dying through Drugs' at Play the Game Conference - YouTube


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

Sorry, I don't have all day. At what point in the video does Lemond recollect the hearsay?


----------



## mpre53 (Oct 25, 2011)

88 rex said:


> He didn't claim that. Lemond appparently claimed that, per ACL's interpretation of a yet to be seen youtube video.


Actually, several e-mail exchanges between LA and Ferrari's son, Stefano, deal with fitting issues. Stefano relays fitting advice from "Schumi" which is how they referred to Michele Ferrari. They're somewhere in the body of USADA's reasoned decision. Schumi was a code word, derived from Michael Schumacher, the German F1 driver who drove for Ferrari (the auto maker).

After Ferrari was convicted of doping offenses in Italy, LA ostensibly severed all relations with him. However, he continued to use him as a consultant by employing his son as a middle man. Instead of wiring payments to Ferrari's Swiss company, he just handed Stefano cash.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> Sorry, I don't have all day. At what point in the video does Lemond recollect the hearsay?


Can't recall. Watch is over a beer.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

mpre53 said:


> Actually, several e-mail exchanges between LA and Ferrari's son, Stefano, deal with fitting issues. Stefano relays fitting advice from "Schumi" which is how they referred to Michele Ferrari. They're somewhere in the body of USADA's reasoned decision. Schumi was a code word, derived from Michael Schumacher, the German F1 driver who drove for Ferrari (the auto maker).
> 
> After Ferrari was convicted of doping offenses in Italy, LA ostensibly severed all relations with him. However, he continued to use him as a consultant by employing his son as a middle man. Instead of wiring payments to Ferrari's Swiss company, he just handed Stefano cash.


using "Schumi" as the codename?? Paying in cash (I wonder if it's in some dark alley?). Sounds some old Soviet spy movie mixed in with some old-fashioned mafia-style money cleansing!! Armstrong is straightup old-skool gangster yo!!


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

mpre53 said:


> Actually, several e-mail exchanges between LA and Ferrari's son, Stefano, deal with fitting issues. Stefano relays fitting advice from "Schumi" which is how they referred to Michele Ferrari. They're somewhere in the body of USADA's reasoned decision. Schumi was a code word, derived from Michael Schumacher, the German F1 driver who drove for Ferrari (the auto maker).
> 
> After Ferrari was convicted of doping offenses in Italy, LA ostensibly severed all relations with him. However, he continued to use him as a consultant by employing his son as a middle man. Instead of wiring payments to Ferrari's Swiss company, he just handed Stefano cash.


On 53X12 Stafano gives advice on using a trainer at least as early as 2005, contrasting it with outdoor riding. 

To think that Ferrari did not know about bicycle trainers is absurd. If Lemond believes and argues that then I have even less respect for the guy.

I have no interest in watching Lemond drone on for 49 minutes. Until aclinjury says where to go on the video I will continue to doubt he repeated the hearsay. And even if Lemond said it, it doesn't make it true or accurate.


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> On 53X12 Stafano gives advice on using a trainer at least as early as 2005, contrasting it with outdoor riding.
> 
> To think that Ferrari did not know about bicycle trainers is absurd. If Lemond believes and argues that then I have even less respect for the guy.
> 
> I have no interest in watching Lemond drone on for 49 minutes. Until aclinjury says where to go on the video I will continue to doubt he repeated the hearsay. And even if Lemond said it, it doesn't make it true or accurate.


You wanted video, I gave you video.
But then you say you have no interest in spending "all day" watching a 49 minute video, and instead want me to spoon feed you on the time of the exact moment. Yet you have spent 4 hours and to follow up in this thread with 4 posts of your own screaming you don't believe nor want to waste time on anything.

Should I just ask if you're still a closet Lance-boy trolling? And weren't you one of the few who first voted in a poll in here that you didn't believe LA was a doper? Your colors showed, then they went into regression after the USADA report, and now they are showing again. Please, move along if you have "no time" instead of spending half a working day droning in here?

The fact is you will dispute anything, say anything, to cast doubt, raise doubt, into other people's words,, to make Armstrong look good and Lemond look bad.. that's what you do,.. yet you're also lazy to find the truth if the truth doesn't jive with your beliefs. There. Ok buddy, it's all cool with me.. :thumbsup:


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

aclinjury said:


> You wanted video, I gave you video.
> But then you say you have no interest in spending "all day" watching a 49 minute video, and instead want me to spoon feed you on the time of the exact moment. Yet you have spent 4 hours and to follow up in this thread with 4 posts of your own screaming you don't believe nor want to waste time on anything.
> 
> Should I just ask if you're still a closet Lance-boy *trolling*? And weren't you one of the few who first voted in a poll in here that you didn't believe LA was a doper? Y*our colors showed*, then they went into regression after the USADA report, and now they are showing again. Please, move along if you have "no time" instead of spending half a working day droning in here?


Trolling. True colors. Lance Fan Boy, ok half. You each need to take 2.5 drinks.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

...


aclinjury said:


> You wanted video, I gave you video.
> But then you say you have no interest in spending "all day" watching a 49 minute video, and instead want me to spoon feed you on the time of the exact moment. Yet you have spent 4 hours and to follow up in this thread with 4 posts of your own screaming you don't believe nor want to waste time on anything.
> 
> Should I just ask if you're still a closet Lance-boy trolling? And weren't you one of the few who first voted in a poll in here that you didn't believe LA was a doper? Your colors showed, then they went into regression after the USADA report, and now they are showing again. Please, move along if you have "no time" instead of spending half a working day droning in here?
> ...


lol


----------



## aclinjury (Sep 12, 2011)

Local Hero said:


> ...
> lol


I'm glad that you can lol with yourself. The lazy man's argument wins the day!


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

aclinjury said:


> I'm glad that you can lol with yourself. The lazy man's argument wins the day!


Congrats. You win the thread. You can cash in your points over there.


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

aclinjury said:


> I'm glad that you can lol with yourself. The lazy man's argument wins the day!


explain


----------



## Local Hero (Jul 8, 2010)

*embarrassed for you*



aclinjury said:


> None of you have seen this 3-yr old youtube video of Lemond giving this speech?
> It's a little long and a bit boring but it's out there, but go watch it, and get it from Lemond yourself.
> 
> Greg LeMond - 'Cycling is dying through Drugs' at Play the Game Conference - YouTube


Your memory fails you. At 12:10 Lemond says that he met Ferrari in 1994 and he had an SRM power meter. Ferrari asked, "what's that? what do you need that for?" 

Then, according to Lemond, he repeated his recollection to someone else who explained the significance (that Ferrari didn't know much about training; Ferrari really is a hematologist). 

But is it significant? Let's not forget. SRMs were invented in the early 90s; Lemond was an early adopter. The story means nothing, even if it is accurate. But is it accurate? 


Right after that little story Lemond rambles incoherently for almost a minute and says, "Oh god I forgot where I was going with this. I'm having a brain fart. It's got to be jet lag. Or it's got to be lead poisoning." 

He then asks the audience to help [remind] him where he was. He claims to have a "total zone out" and says he's embarrassed. And that's when I felt embarrassed for him and stopped watching.


----------



## Coolhand (Jul 28, 2002)

*Moderators Note*

Stay on point everyone- enough of the insults.


----------



## davidka (Dec 12, 2001)

aclinjury, I misunderstood your point about the trainer, sorry for that. I still assert that Ferrari is a de-facto coach. I really think that being a great hematologist would not be enough for him to become the #1 guy in this business. He would have had a sophisticated system that integrates training and "enhancement".


----------



## 1stmh (Apr 7, 2007)

said:


> aclinjury, I misunderstood your point about the trainer, sorry for that. I still assert that Ferrari is a de-facto coach. I really think that being a great hematologist would not be enough for him to become the #1 guy in this business. He would have had a sophisticated system that integrates training and "enhancement".


Tyler speaks about this in his book. He says that the first time he really had anyone coach him was when he moved to CSC, began working with Fuentes, and then was introduced and began working with Luigi Cecchini (sp?). He says that his coaching (along with doping) really helped him. He says that Ferrari helped him with doping. Not training. Maybe he did with other people like Lance (maybe even a schlock) but not Tyler.

More on Cecchini: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luigi_Cecchini


----------



## moskowe (Mar 14, 2011)

Perhaps we haven't been reading the same book. I remember clearly Tyler saying in the book that Ferrari was devising the entire training plan of Lance, while Chris the Idiot served as a front for "scientific training."

I also don't remember Tyler saying that Ferrari wasn't a real coach, just that he didn't care about him as much as the numbers. There is a reason everyone went to Ferrari for training advice, it's because he's the one who knows best how to mix training and doping.


----------



## 1stmh (Apr 7, 2007)

Rogers To Swap Sky For Saxo-Tinkoff? | Cyclingnews.com
Rogers to Saxo-Tinkoff. Me wonders...


----------



## kbiker3111 (Nov 7, 2006)

Were we reading the same book?

Chapter 6:


> Lance and Ferrari showed me there were more variables than I'd ever imagine, and they all mattered: wattages, cadence, intervals, zones, joules, lactic acid, and, of course, hematocrit. Each ride was a math problem: a precisely mapped set of numbers for us to hit-which makes it sound easy but in reality it was incredibly difficult. Its one thing to go ride for six hours. It's another to ride for six hours following a program of wattages and cadences, especially when those wattages and cadences are set to push you to the ragged edge of your abilities.


Tyler goes on to talk about how Ferrari administered tests (including blood) and helped him set fitness goals. That sounds like turn of the millennium cycling coach to me. 

Later Tyler says that Cecchini was the first coach he sought out and this is accurate, but like most domestiques, he was given a type of program from his team.

(FWIW, didn't Millar also work with Cecchini when he made his comeback?)


----------



## superflylondon (Aug 24, 2008)

/not trolling but don't must euro's call the trainer "the turbo". I've read multiple interviews where a pro refers to the trainer as the turbo.

anyway it seems everyone is linked to something nowadays. geez!


----------



## 1stmh (Apr 7, 2007)

kbiker3111 said:


> Were we reading the same book?
> 
> Chapter 6:
> 
> ...


Millar did, but dropped him when he found out that Vinokurov (who worked with him too) had tested positive.

The point with Ferrari wasn't that he was not a cycling coach. He was. But I seriously doubt anyone went to him for cycling coaching without getting the full preparation/recovery* program. That was what he was good at. If you wanted someone who was good and clean you would have looked elsewhere. Mapei Center maybe?!

Preparation and recover both being doping terms.


----------



## The Tedinator (Mar 12, 2004)

I am sure that the Sky fan boys will have a valid reason why a trusted Wiggins domestique, having the self described "best ride of his life power numbers wise", *post training with Dr. EPO*, is leaving the best team in the world with still another year on his contract. Oh yeah, leaving said team for a team that is not even going to be a pro tour level team in 2013.

Let me save you the mental gymnastics. He is a doper, and the jig is up with Brailsford. Like I said in July and was castigated for it.


----------



## spookyload (Jan 30, 2004)

aclinjury said:


> I know plenty of Asian friends in Thailand and the Philippines, and a couple in Mexico, whose English level is that of 5th grade ESL, all of them cycling enthusiasts, but none has any problem when I used cycling jargons with them. Yes they know what a trainer is. You can't seriously be suggesting that a cycling coach (albeit an Italian one) doesn't know what a trainer is. Ferrari, coach he ain't. Dope, yes.


How very American of you. I know if I go to my LBS here in Germany and ask for a trainer, I am going to get a running shoe. Different countries call mag trainers different things.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

spookyload said:


> How very American of you.


Hey...I've been reported for MUCH less.


----------



## Mike T. (Feb 3, 2004)

Rogers is gone according to the reports today -

Michael Rogers Leaves Sky For Saxo-Tinkoff | Cyclingnews.com

Him leaving is no surprise at all.

I think we're seeing now seeing the staff that would rather just walk away from Sky (Yates, Rogers) than admit to doping and having a stain on their career. But where does Dowsett fit into all this? His move to Movistar was weird and very suspicious -

Team Sky lose British national time-trial champion Alex Dowsett to Spanish outfit Movistar as exodus continues - Telegraph


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Admit it to the SKY owner or just run like a rat from a burning ship. Seems either way they are all now marked individuals. 
Everyone knows why they HAD to leave.


----------



## LostViking (Jul 18, 2008)

Okay, anyone who leaves Sky is a doper - that makes sense.

Always wondered where Cav got his accelleration from, now it's perfectly clear - the Manx Missle is doped to the gills!

Sky=Hotel California: "You can check in, but you can never leave"


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Cav made his deal to leave before the ZERO tolerance policy came into play.

And that whole deal still smells. The world's best sprinter breaks his contract and leaves. SKY doesn't want to support me?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

metoou2 said:


> Cav made his deal to leave before the ZERO tolerance policy came into play.
> 
> And that whole deal still smells. The world's best sprinter breaks his contract and leaves. SKY doesn't want to support me?


Wiggo is the kind of GC rider who requires a lot of domestiques for support. Cav is the kind of bunch sprinter who also requires support and a lead out train. Cav and Wiggo simply couldn't be 100% effective on the same team at the same time. Personally, I would have thought Wiggo should focus on the Giro and give Cav the Tour, especially if Alberto is riding the tour.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

spade2you said:


> Wiggo is the kind of GC rider who requires a lot of domestiques for support. Cav is the kind of bunch sprinter who also requires support and a lead out train. Cav and Wiggo simply couldn't be 100% effective on the same team at the same time. Personally, I would have thought Wiggo should focus on the Giro and give Cav the Tour, especially if Alberto is riding the tour.


Ya I know..........saw the same interviews you and everyone else has.

So SKY management wasn't astute enough to figure out all these conflicting riders / rider styles BEFORE they signed up Mr. Dish?

If they couldn't, then that speaks volumes about their inability to manage a team.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

metoou2 said:


> Ya I know..........saw the same interviews you and everyone else has.
> 
> So SKY management wasn't astute enough to figure out all these conflicting riders / rider styles BEFORE they signed up Mr. Dish?
> 
> If they couldn't, then that speaks volumes about their inability to manage a team.


T-Mobile did it a few years back, but hindsight is always 20/20. Three TdF stage wins is a slow year for Cav. I would like to think that 1st and 2nd on GC plus all their stage wins was worth more $ than what HTC was paid during Cav's tenure. 

Mismanaged or a bit too ambitious. There was only one way to find out. If he stays healthy, he should easily have more than 3 stage wins next year. Hard to say about the green jersey due to Sagan's versatility.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Sagan will lay waste to everyone.
I'm just talkin.............who knows?


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

metoou2 said:


> Sagan will lay waste to everyone.
> I'm just talkin.............who knows?


Sagan should do well next year. It could be close if Cav is fully supported next year.


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

Sagan is the new Dish.

Any cyclist signing boobage is o.k. with me. Has Cav ever tried that?

I did, didn't turn out so well.


----------



## spade2you (May 12, 2009)

metoou2 said:


> Sagan is the new Dish.
> 
> Any cyclist signing boobage is o.k. with me. Has Cav ever tried that?
> 
> I did, didn't turn out so well.


Cav doesn't need to sign melons. His wife has quite the rack.

View attachment 271952


----------



## metoou2 (Mar 18, 2009)

We're going to get whacked for 'thread drift'..............oh well.

Cav's wife is smokin hot...........as long as she has on her make-up. No make-up, not so good.


----------

