The pro peleton needs Wiggins.

[jarlrmai]

That's how we train up north.

 

[smutchin]

Ah, if only your post could then cut to a montage of Wiggins running along dragging tyres through the snow, and so forth.

Better leave out the bits where he's being injected with dubious substances though.

 

[Pedrosanchezo]

Plan B GC riders - it's true, perhaps the only viable rider to be a plan B in recent times was when Froome rode for Wiggins in the Vuelta in 2011 and the Tour in 2012.
It took an exceptional rider to allow people to talk about SKY and their plan Bs. The problem for Wiggins' 3 week GC chances these days is he likely requires someone of Froome's capability (ie. better than him) to make him a GC winner on a parcours suited to his attributes.
The pro tour doesn't need that - it needs proper man to man racing, not the tedious delivery of a bonkers strong SKY train...

Good point Thom, i do wonder what is more lethal though:

1) Froome as leader and being led by Porte, or similar.

or

2) Wiggins as leader and being led by Froome?

It brings to the table an actual plan B that could work should Wiggins fail or crash out. Unlike the 2011 Vuelta though, there could be no uncertainty as to who the leader should be. It might be the best option for Sky but it is never going to happen again i think. The 2 times they have done it in a grand tour though they have had 1st and 2nd (TDF 2012) and 2nd and 3rd (Vuelta 2011).

Have they enjoyed such success since?

Froome is in the unfortunate position of not having his own Froome dog super domestique and as such all the other members of team Sky come off looking rather average, even if harshly so.

Just thinking out loud........

 

[thom]

Good point Thom, i do wonder what is more lethal though:

1) Froome as leader and being led by Porte, or similar.

or

2) Wiggins as leader and being led by Froome?

It brings to the table an actual plan B that could work should Wiggins fail or crash out. Unlike the 2011 Vuelta though, there could be no uncertainty as to who the leader should be. It might be the best option for Sky but it is never going to happen again i think. The 2 times they have done it in a grand tour though they have had 1st and 2nd (TDF 2012) and 2nd and 3rd (Vuelta 2011).

Have they enjoyed such success since?

Froome is in the unfortunate position of not having his own Froome dog super domestique and as such all the other members of team Sky come off looking rather average, even if harshly so.

Just thinking out loud........

No argument these days - 1) better than 2).
Froome is only unfortunate in that he fell off his bike - Wiggins was unreasonably fortunate to have had Froome.
This is rather tedious innit ?

 

[Pro Tour Punditry]

This is rather tedious innit ?

I did try...

 

[John the Monkey]

I agree, it should be about racing but realistically, it also has to be about broadening the fan base to a wider mass market with attendant media coverage and better sponsorship deals. It's either that, and accept all the negatives that go with the intense pressures put on professional athletes, or go back to the grudging tolerance of other road users who remain ignorant of the sport and resent the inconvenience caused by club toad races.

That assumes that success for UK sport cyclists equates to an improvement on our treatment on UK roads. Even at the high points of GB/Sky's success, my experience was merely that people said "Wiggo/Brad" more often than they had said "Lance" when telling me to "get on the f* cyclepath"

...popularising the sport has many more up-sides than down, not least of which would be a greater understanding, awareness and tolerance of cyclists by motorists generally.

I think that's an unproven (possibly unprovable) assumption. As much as I enjoy it, promotion of sport cycling (which takes place at "special" times, and at "special" places, may not do much for better treatment of the quotidian cyclist in the UK, and I think it's optimistic, at best, to place too many of our eggs in that particular basket.

UK Cycling is hamstrung by the idea that "encouragement" and "inspiration" (cheap, and without the troublesome need to inconvenience motorists) will be enough to produce a "cycling revolution".

 

[tigger]

Is this a tread about the pro peloton needs Wiggins (answer is no) or team sky needs Wiggins (answer maybe for a year mainly due to PR value) or British Cycling needs Wiggins (answer maybe until Rio but probably stretching it). Or is it a thread about should Wiggins have been in the Sky Tour de France team ( answer yes on form and ability, but clearly and understandably no due the disruptive influence in the team and his sour relationship with Froome). And whilst we're at it lets have a Wiggins v Froome debate too.

What is this crazy hybrid nonsense of a thread? The answer to the original question is clearly "no". Are there not other threads which have already dealt with the rest of the tedium?