Less is more?
Last Post 10/31/2013 12:36 PM by ChinookPass .. 3 Replies.
10/08/2013 11:09 AM
10/08/2013 11:15 AM
Fewer races, eliminating overlapping days seem to be the biggest goals. I've never really thought that overlapping races was that big of a deal, though I am not paying the bills for a team either. Most sports have overlapping events all the time. I think if they can improve the product with fewer races, then they can expand the calendar in the future when there are more sponsors in the sport. The two big tours in the US would probably not make the cut to the list but would still be on the lesser calendar.
The best thing the UCI could do to improve the product in my opinion would be to make the TV access more accessible and uniform. Even paying $5 or so per race to be guaranteed I can see it live would be a big improvement over the current cluster.
10/08/2013 12:03 PM
cycling has a foot in the past and a foot in the future, makes it tough from the management/promotion end of it. Needs a big contract that carries the whole enchilada promtion wise, unfortunately that will probably never happen
10/31/2013 12:36 PM
The calender will be evolving to 120 days of racing with over half the days covered by the 3 Grand Tours, yet only 22 riders per team. So if a team sends a little less than half the team to a GT, the rest of the team is probably resting and training for the next GT, it seems like a lot of smaller races will get starved out because they depend on appearances by the top teams for publicity. Also more riders will be asked to ride multiple GTs which probably won't make for better racing.
Active Forums 4.1
NOT LICENSED FOR PRODUCTION USE