Franchise or not?

iregk

Not sure if anyone has noticed it or not but Jonny Vaughters has been discussing the future of cycling and how the sport can progress. One of the topics he was pushing was breaking the barrier, altering the thinking, whatever you want to call it of the cycling fans. Essentially going the way of football, rugby, hockey etc... Follow the team not the individual.

Now that's difficult for a sport which is at the end of the day a team sport but where the main victor is always an individual presented as such. So how would you feel. Would you follow Team Saxo as opposed to Nico?

This was discussed on twitter last night to some extent and I'm not sure where I sit. Personally I think a big problem is lack of identification of a team. For instance Barcelona, everyone know them, where they call home and their history. Who can tell me what Omega Pharma Quickstep whatever was called 5 years ago, who was the manager and where are they based? Those things unless resolved I think will make the Franchise pretty difficult.

Thoughts?

ednwireland

the problem is cycling teams dont have a geographical base so unless there big warehouses class as it in an industrial estate somewhere.
so you never started with a fan base like soccer. considering cycling teams are trade teams as you say if you supported omega pharma lotto who do you follow now omega pharma quickstep or lotto belisol ?
your starting from a different premise
i just think cycling doesnt have the same structure. the stadiums are the races so its a very transitory thing. and in europe most people seem to support there local riders above all else (as they do here)

531

ednwireland wrote: »

the problem is cycling teams dont have a geographical base so unless there big warehouses class as it in an industrial estate somewhere.
so you never started with a fan base like soccer. considering cycling teams are trade teams as you say if you supported omega pharma lotto who do you follow now omega pharma quickstep or lotto belisol ?
your starting from a different premise
i just think cycling doesnt have the same structure. the stadiums are the races so its a very transitory thing. and in europe most people seem to support there local riders above all else (as they do here)

You are correct, edmwireland, unless you are a fan of the Sean Kelly Team, sponsored by whoever and whose spiritual geographical base is Ireland!

ednwireland

531 wrote: »

geographical base is Ireland!

wrong

The team is a UCI Continental cycling team registered in Belgium and participates mainly in races on the UCI Europe Tour. The team has however, received invites to take part in races on the Pro Tour, such as the 2011 Tour of Oman and Tour of Qatar. The team is managed by Kurt Bogaerts alongside Team Director Sean Kelly and is based at Merchtem, Belgium.

https://www.anpost.ie/AnPost/IrishCycling/The_Sean_Kelly_Team/

spiritually yes geographically definitely not even there teamcars have belgian plates

Lumen

Yes Jonathan, the fans are the problem.

:rolleyes:

iregk

That's the funny thing. Most will tell you Ireland has one team which is Sean Kelly's team but they are actually registered in Belgium while Ireland has 3 teams registered whom are all Italian!

I agree with your points though ednwireland. For me the main problem is the lack of location and the lack of consistency. I think JV's point though is teams should setup a base similar to what he and David Millar have done with Garmin. Also he is talking about name changes to bring it more inline with franchise sports. So rather than Omega Pharma Whatever the team becomes Team Gent and as sponsors you have Omega Pharma Quick Step etc... Similar Team Sky becomes Manchester Cycling or whatever with a sponsor of Sky. Think of it like your local club level. My club is Reservoir Cogs CC, we will always be that sponsored by Moxi and Bryko. Similar to those on here that ride for Orwell sponsored by Dundrum etc...

Could that work at pro level?

531

I do not think it would work, iregk. Sponsors now have teams named after them for the money they put in. They would unlikely put the same money in for what would be less exposure for their brand. Money talks.

couerdelion

Euskaltel-Euskadi are Basque based are/were more or less financed by their supporters who paid €100 a piece to be part of the supporters club. In that respect it works.
I guess in the same way a cycling team could base itself in a particular area, set up junior teams in the area, organise a race or two and support local clubs and in return they would get community support.

Chips Lovell

iregk wrote: »

Who can tell me what Omega Pharma Quickstep whatever was called 5 years ago, who was the manager and where are they based? Those things unless resolved I think will make the Franchise pretty difficult.

You kind of picked the worst example though there. There's few times who have a stronger identity than Quickstep. They are the Flandrian team and have been for years now.

On the broader issue, why do people think that cycling needs to have fans in the same way as football. It's possible to be a big fan in the sport without having to hitch your wagon to any particular team or rider.

ROK ON

Many fans follow particular races as opposed to the athletes or their team.
This in one respect is different to football etc.

Macy0161

Lumen wrote: »

Yes Jonathan, the fans are the problem.

:rolleyes:

Not sure that's quite what he's getting at. It's all part of his overall vision of sharing TV revenue, fixed teams so less pressure on immediate results for both teams and riders etc. Not sure I'm convinced (in any sport) of no route/ restricted route up the ladder, but get the logic of it.

Teams can develop support though, and in that I think teams like Slipstream that have a strong and open personality leading them, and an ethos, that fans can believe in, are already doing so.

Lumen

Macy0161 wrote: »

Not sure that's quite what he's getting at. It's all part of his overall vision of sharing TV revenue, fixed teams so less pressure on immediate results for both teams and riders etc. Not sure I'm convinced (in any sport) of no route/ restricted route up the ladder, but get the logic of it.

Teams can develop support though, and in that I think teams like Slipstream that have a strong and open personality leading them, and an ethos, that fans can believe in, are already doing so.

This is all about doping. Doping is not the fault of the fans.

iregk

Jesus can we have one discussion where doping doesn't come up. It's not all about doping. He was one piece of a much wider discussion that JV was talking through regarding the future of cycling. He never said the fans were the problem he was simply discussing the psychology of cycling fans as opposed to other sports.

Lumen

iregk wrote: »

Jesus can we have one discussion where doping doesn't come up. It's not all about doping. He was one piece of a much wider discussion that JV was talking through regarding the future of cycling. He never said the fans were the problem he was simply discussing the psychology of cycling fans as opposed to other sports.

There aren't any links in this thread to what Vaughters actually said.

Do you have any?

iregk

There are no links as I was looking to see what other boards users and cycling fans thought and what their individual opinions on the subject are. Then you barged in with the JV attack without offering any opinion on the topic for discussion. Can we not discuss something independently?

Lumen

iregk wrote: »

There are no links as I was looking to see what other boards users and cycling fans thought and what their individual opinions on the subject are. Then you barged in with the JV attack without offering any opinion on the topic for discussion. Can we not discuss something independently?

You started the thread with a bunch of references to what JV has supposedly said, and now you apparently want to exclude his opinions from the discussion.

Don't understand.