Is the new Sky Team good for cycling?

Vélo

What are everyone's opinions of the new sky team?

Vélo

No

I think I did this properly, if not.....ah well.

IM0

Its got wiggo and it might as well be called team Daz or Silit Bang! for all I care, its just a name. Or am I missing something here?

niceonetom

Don't care

Sponsoring a team? Fine.

Buying the rights to broadcast tours or classics? No way Rupert you evil aussie prick!!

papac

No

Sponsoring a team? Fine.

Buying the rights to broadcast tours or classics? No way Rupert you evil aussie prick!!

Normally I would be in total agreement but I think pro cycling needs all the exposure it can get atm-
Unfortunately Murdoch ain't going away so if cycling gets a higher profile through his nasty machine thats a plus imo.

niceonetom

Don't care

papac wrote: »

Normally I would be in total agreement but I think pro cycling needs all the exposure it can get atm-
Unfortunately Murdoch ain't going away so if cycling gets a higher profile through his nasty machine thats a plus imo.

Don't more people have eurosport than sky sports? If rupert buys it, fewer people will see the tour.

I'm confused as to why so many people think a subscription based broadcaster will make more people watch cycling. More likely the business plan would be fewer people, but paying more.

petethedrummer

As I get older I get become less and less interested in professional sports, so I don't really care either way. Pro cycling never made me want to ride a bike.

Do you reckon the UCI would become more or less clandestine with more money floating around?

papac

No

Don't more people have eurosport than sky sports? If rupert buys it, fewer people will see the tour.

I'm confused as to why so many people think a subscription based broadcaster will make more people watch cycling. More likely the business plan would be fewer people, but paying more

I never said more people would see it live and direct- they probably won't. The sport will have a higher profile though I think.
Pro-cycling is a revenue driven sport and in todays world it can't be successful without the likes of Murdoch casting his beady eyes on it sooner or later.
Only reason Eurosport have it now is that few people are interested so the rights are cheap I'd say.

TheToecutter

I hope TG4 will still show it. You're pretty much guaranteed to get your question read out

Junior

papac wrote: »

I never said more people would see it live and direct- they probably won't. The sport will have a higher profile though I think.
Pro-cycling is a revenue driven sport and in todays world it can't be successful without the likes of Murdoch casting his beady eyes on it sooner or later.
Only reason Eurosport have it now is that few people are interested so the rights are cheap I'd say.

So how will it have a higher profile if it has a more limited audience, that's the equivalent of saying lets target this product to 1 person and get them to buy so we have 100% Market Share..

niceonetom

Don't care

papac wrote: »

I never said more people would see it live and direct- they probably won't. The sport will have a higher profile though I think.
Pro-cycling is a revenue driven sport and in todays world it can't be successful without the likes of Murdoch casting his beady eyes on it sooner or later.
Only reason Eurosport have it now is that few people are interested so the rights are cheap I'd say.

There are a few things there...

I guess I equated "raising the profile" with gaining a larger audience. I can see that they might not be totally synonymous though. At least to some...

Pro-cycling is a revenue driven industry, and that certainly can't survive without capitalists seeking to maximise the money they can make from it as a spectacle - but is that good for cycling? As a sport, not an industry or a commodity to be bid for and sold on, subscription by subscription to the public? I'm not convinced it automatically is. It ultimately depends on how you think of a "successful" sport... viewership? revenue? playing population? column inches? or more subjective things like its purity as a test of skill, strength, guile and character? Dare I say, the beauty of the sport.

Would fans of olympic greco-roman wrestling allow it slowly morph into WWF because of the massive revenue that would bring to the sport? That's an extreme example, I know, but the point is that seeing a sport purely as a commercial entity is corrosive, and I doubt bskyb see anything in terms that cannot be quantified on a quarterly report.

DirkVoodoo

No

niceonetom wrote: »

Would fans of olympic greco-roman wrestling allow it slowly morph into WWF because of the massive revenue that would bring to the sport? That's an extreme example, I know, but the point is that seeing a sport purely as a commercial entity is corrosive, and I doubt bskyb see anything in terms that cannot be quantified on a quarterly report.

Ughh, could you imagine:

Lance: "Hey Contador, we used to be team mates, now I see your hanging around with my woman Starla, come into the ring if you are man enough".

Cue "Little spanish flea" along with tacky pyrotechnics display, Contador cycles down the ramp to the ring.

Before he climbs over the ropes, Popovych appears with a folded up turbo trainer and smacks him over the head, boos ring around the crowd.

And so forth....

ednwireland

No

yes absolutely new sponsor to cycling never a bad thing

will you have to buy a sky contract to watch cycling on british/irish tv in a year or twos time then that will be bad but fairly irrelavent to european cycling in general (apart from having a well funded team competing against the establishment )

papac

No

I am-to an extent-playing devils advocate here.I hate the commercialization of sport and everything else.
I hanker-in my idealistic moments- for a "small is beautiful" anarchist utopia.

I do feel that if a sport can be made cool to the TV besotted kids that it may have a trickle down effect-leading to increased participation/spectator levels..Maybe thats wishful thinking on my part.
Apparently though the profile generated by the recent British cycling successes has led to a big interest in cycling at under age level.(I know thats the olympics and not the same thing).

Of course Sky don't care about the "spirit" of cycling but as I said -Sky ain't going away and they may increase interest.

Beasty

No

Would you rather Sky throw their subscriber's money at cycling, or some other sport?

Ultimately this is new money to the sport, and is now very much in Sky's interests to promote cycling. The additional cash and exposure should, over the long term, be a benefit to cycling

DirkVoodoo

No

I love football, and I like to think that football still exists, not as a commercial entity (I shudder when the NFL refer to "franchises") but as clubs with fans who have gone to games as families, supporting their local team.

Money has destroyed english football, it may be of a higher quality and we have lots of top players in the premiership, but unless you have the biggest transfer budget you can forget about playing the beautiful game.

As little as I know about cycling, I know that keeping this "local club mentality" I have from football is lunacy. I mean, cycling teams are the epitome of commercialization, they aren't local clubs, they are owned by companies. Riders change allegiance for money, to be with countrymen, whatever, but I don't think it's because they grew up supporting Liquigas and always dreamed of pulling the jersey on. Heck, wasn't the maillot juane yellow to promote some sponsors phone book or something?

More money and more attention from a wider audience probably means that drugs will be tolerated even less, or at least you would hope. I can't see Sky wanting to be anywhere near a drugs scandal if they are spending big bucks on the team and television rights.

sy

No

My fear is that we will have a very distinct two tier system as has happened in so many sports eg premiership. The lesser teams will gradually fade into the background and Sky, Radioshack, Garmin Cervelo etc or their future equivalents will dominate(consume) the sport. In the long run this will not be good for professional cycling.. Good article here

sy

No

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

Heck, wasn't the maillot juane yellow to promote some sponsors phone book or something?

Newspaper ( that had yellow pages!)

Lumen

Big money will clean up the sport.

There's no doping in the Premiership or the ATP Tour, right?

sy

No

Lumen wrote: »

There's no doping in the Premiership or the ATP Tour, right?

Right!

Captain Havoc

No

Like DirkVoodoo, I also love football and it annoys the shít out of me that no one can see beyond the premiership. Fat cünts that sit on their sofas not having a clue about how skilfull a game it is. That's what sky has created in football, nobody appreciates how good a team Bohemians or Shamrock Rovers are, that the achievements of Sporting Fingal and Wexford Youths in recent years are phenominal. All people say, league of Ireland is shít because the only thing they understand is Man UTD etc.... It's much easier to appreciate how good Man UTD are when you see lesser teams play. Anywhere I've lived I've gone to watch my local team, I love going to the stadium.
The flip side is with golf, another sport I play regularly. Since it's popularisation, it has become accessable to everyone, no longer a posh game but you can even find scangers playing golf. I read an article last year (the indo I think) that cycling is the new golf and this could be true. Clubs and bicycles are as cheap or as expensive as you like, there's always comparisons of equipment in the two. I think sky want to make cycling more popular so they can obviously cash in on it. I wouldn't like cycling to become the sport that attracts those fat wänkers who follow it because it's cool but more like the golfers who play as cycling is a very enjoyable hobby and like golf you don't have to be exceptionally gifted to participate.

DirkVoodoo

No

If I have to listen to Jamie Redknapp or Andy Gray call it "the beast league in the world" one more time, I will scream! Give me La Liga any day!

Rafa doesn't use drugs, the man is just a supreme athlete and he has worked hard on adapting his game to grass and hardcourts.

sy

No

Captain Havoc wrote: »

..... I wouldn't like cycling to become the sport that attracts those fat w***** who follow it because it's cool .......

ROK ON

The answer is both.

On the plus side Sky will put unrivalled marketing behind the sport. That could help the sport to become more popular.
Bare in mind that in Anglo Saxon countries the sport has been increasing in popularity for some time now. This is just part of it. Sky have seen an opportunity and will try to make the most of it.
They have succeeded in the mass popularisation of other sports and have done this by identifying the story" of the day.
Eg England (world cup winner), Munster and Leicester in rugby.
Tiger in golf.
Super clubs in football.
There are I an sure others and they hope that Wiggo is one in cycling.

There is a downsidd to this for some.
1 mass appeal appeals to lowest common denominator. For this reason many die hard rugby fans simply miss how local andintimate rugby (both codes) used to be.
2mass appeal can bring very big money. Like everything else in life it flows to where success is evident. Dirk makes fair point on this and Sy's observation on super team (all anglo saxon btw) is prescient.

Many of us here are new to cycling so we can't exactly stomp around the playground saying that they stole our sport. But don't be surprised if an increased popularity makesbthe sport very very predictable and leads ro a loss of all those charming but utterly dysfunctional Belgian, Italian and French teams.

I agree with Jerseyeire in that cycling is the new golf. In my profession I see an increasing amount of folks taking up cycling.

ednwireland

No

Captain Havoc wrote: »

I wouldn't like cycling to become the sport that attracts those fat wänkers

Sorry ill get my coat

Slideshowbob

No

Has Sky made any indication that they intend to look for broadcast rights for any big races?

Captain Havoc

No

ednwireland wrote: »

Sorry ill get my coat

Sorry, I'm not having a go at anyones weight, I'm not exactley a stick insect myself. I'm on about those "experts" that sit on the couch, not having kicked a football since they were 15, who couldn't name a player outside the premiership. I just think sport is something to participate in, I think when you play or have played sport you can appreciate that sport and others but there's far too many lazy sods with an opinion out there.

ednwireland

No

only messing, no sense of humour today? Fat leeds fan here! No smileys, on my phone

jwshooter

No

lads stop with the football ,hatefull game.

Captain Havoc

No

ednwireland wrote: »

only messing, no sense of humour today? Fat leeds fan here! No smileys, on my phone

Sorry, bad day at work, internet went down (so I wasn't able to do my job or look at boards) so I was in foul humour all day, although my "fück off I'm not negotiating" attitude seems to have got me a few sales today, I went into Michael O'Leary mode, we're the cheapest etc. etc. etc.

niceonetom

Don't care

The last few post of this thread do not inspire confidence. The TDU is the stage for the debut of Rupert's new superteam, and still it gets bumped from SkySports4...

I think it's a mistake to think that just because sky is funding a team that they will take it upon themselves to pump in money to the sport and become the tide that raises all boats. It seems just as likely to me that they could buy it and allow it to rot at the fringes of their schedule; perhaps due to indifference, competing priorities or sheer incompetence. The money involved in buying would probably be piffling compared to the telephone number like sums they pay for golf and football - and just because they can crush eurosport like a bug doen't mean that we, the viewing public, will be left with a better product, or the riders a better sport.

DirkVoodoo

No

I think after the olympics Sky realised the massive potential for cycling viewing figures in the UK. Riders like Hoy, pendelton, wiggins and cavendish are all British, the Olympics are coming up in 2 years and team sky are aiming at a british team win (or winner) in the tour de france.

It sounds to me like they are just doing the same as they did in 1992 and looking to jump into the market as it is on the verge of exploding in the UK and Ireland.

Vélo

No

DirkVoodoo wrote: »

I think after the olympics Sky realised the massive potential for cycling viewing figures in the UK. Riders like Hoy, pendelton, wiggins and cavendish are all British, the Olympics are coming up in 2 years and team sky are aiming at a british team win (or winner) in the tour de france.

It sounds to me like they are just doing the same as they did in 1992 and looking to jump into the market as it is on the verge of exploding in the UK and Ireland.

Exactly

TinyExplosions

No

sy wrote: »

My fear is that we will have a very distinct two tier system as has happened in so many sports eg premiership. The lesser teams will gradually fade into the background and Sky, Radioshack, Garmin Cervelo etc or their future equivalents will dominate(consume) the sport. In the long run this will not be good for professional cycling.. Good article here

That is a slight fear for sure, but hen I think it has been slowly heading that was since Discovery and Lance's run of victories... it was the the real start of the era when 'teams' dominated instead of one or two riders.

However, I still think that the season is long enough, and the races varied enough that it precludes a little of this happening (at least at the moment). For example, I find it hard to think that a single team could get a whitewash of all the jerseys in a Grand Tour etc, so it still leaves some room for the smaller teams to get victories and increase their revenues.

As for Sky, I think it's generally a positive... having Brailsford on board makes me thank that on the whole, the team will be a clean one... he doesn't suffer any funny business at all, and at the first hint of drug use I don't think he'd have any problem getting rid of a rider (he's done it before at the olympics don't forget). I'd like to see the same ideas that he brought to GB Cycling find its way onto a Road Team, simply to see what results you can achieve with attention to detail. The partnership with Sky hasn't adversely affected the track team, and so I don't think it will for the Pro Team.

As for changing the face of the sport, I just can't see that happening really, at least not so long as the ASO are in charge.... there's no finer group of pig headded frenchies in the world!

Finally, TV rights.... fuck it, that's what the internets are for!

Chips Lovell

LOL

If I hear one more middleclass idiot saying how SKY has ruined football I'm going to hunt them down. YOU are the ones who ruined football ..

petethedrummer

TinyExplosions wrote: »

As for Sky, I think it's generally a positive... having Brailsford on board makes me thank that on the whole, the team will be a clean one... he doesn't suffer any funny business at all

Except for Rob Hayles and his naturally high hematocrit.

hinault

I think that it is too early to say.

SKY would appear to be a window for British professional road cycling, so in that context it is probably a good thing.

Do i think Mr Murdoch is a benign influence in the sport - or any sport for that matter?
No.