As usual, @DarthShivious conveys my message more succinctly. 
1 Like
I assume that is why so many offensive and defensive line men have died early…the life expectancy of those former NFL players is about 50 isn’t it? Similar with Flo jo in athletics
1 Like
They do, but it’s a bit different.
Baseball went through a HUGE steroids scandal in the late 1990’s early 2000’s that scarred the game for a long time because a lot of long standing, cherished records were broken by dopers. It took the game years to recover but it regained most of its trust because nowdays you can just tell the players LOOK different than they did in the steroids era and most people tend to agree the game has been cleaned up (for the most part)
Football is interesting, because its rare that a big star player has been busted for using anything performance enhancing. It’s usually fringe/mediocre players that have been caught so it doesn’t end up being a major story and/or tarnishing the game. I doubt any fan of the game would tell you everyone is clean, but for whatever reason its just not as big of an issue.
Basketball, I can’t really recall any big performance enhancing drug scandals.
What I do find interesting is how Cycling still lives under the dark cloud of doping, while Track and Field mostly gets a pass in the public eye.
I watched a documentary type programme on NETFLIX (Last Chance U) and a coach said ‘after this game, some of you will never play the game again. Enjoy yourselves!’
It had never occurred to me before. I felt a sadness for those young men.
I don’t doubt that plays a factor with some. But they also get their heads smashed around quite for a good 10+ years. And some of those guys are just absolutely massive and it doesn’t seem like you see a lot of people who 300+ giants late in life.
1 Like
Exactly. Doping isn’t what prevents cycling from being relevant in the US and I’d argue it’s not the relevant anywhere in the world. Even among those who participate and understand cycling at some level, it’s not widely followed. As much as I like watching bike racing on TV, I have to admit that it’s a pretty terrible spectator sport. Even in the places where cycling is huge, there just isn’t that much viewership (so no real $ being generated). When only a handful of superstars are making more than a couple million $'s per year, it’s just a totally different world than any of the major sports where there is real revenue in play. The average salary in the pro peleton is probably around $100k, which is nothing in the context of major sports (where average salaries are in the millions and the top earners are well into the 10’s of millions per year).
In the US, I see a lot of groundswell on the MTB side with the big push from NICA in recent years. It’s far from mainstream, but the vast majority of serious young cyclists I see these days are on the MTB side. Road racing is completely irrelevant and gravel is just this fun format that is well suited to old farts wanting to ride their bikes. I don’t see a path to “mainstream” for any of this, but MTB is the best positioned to have some level of relevance.
I’m still excited to see what Keegan might do on the WT, but there is basically zero chance he will become a household name in the US, even if he does very well.
1 Like
Isn’t this the Swenson going to dominate the WT thread?
This is the Stetina definition of the “Spirit of Gravel” 
I have zero desire to see cycling go “mainstream”…as long as I have been involved in the sport, that has always been talked about, to which I can only say “why?” Why do we care if it goes “mainstream”? The reality is that for most people, it is just looking for vindication / recognition on some level that the sport is worthwhile.
We came as close to mainstream as we are ever going to come during the Lance years…but other than Trek and a few others cashing it, nothing really changed much.
If it were “mainstream” it’d be a lot easier to watch, funding for development, school, age group, events would increase, cycling safety would be more recognised as a need by the masses and cycle lanes etc etc would be less of a scourge.
The Lance era was very short really, all things considered.
Obviously cycling will never be on a level of the big sports, football, NFL, basketball so 
.
2 Likes
The sport of cycling is completely independent from the need for infrastructure to support cycling as a mode of transportation. IMO, they are re both best served as independent concepts.
1 Like
I’d debate that. In general, you see better cycling infrastructure in places where cycling is big from a sport/exercise/hobby (which I’d say are all related). Probably not a coincidence.
3 Likes
Hard disagree, in terms of mainstream being awareness and acceptance, they go hand in hand.
I acknowledge that to us commuting and "cycling’ is different. Look at places where cycling is not mainstream, and most “cyclists” don’t use cycle lanes and infuriate road users. To the general public, we are all two wheeled weirdos
Let’s face it - many sports, including swimming are really boring to watch. I don’t mind watching the gold medal round but who watches all the heats? Even cycling - the majority of the racing is boring. Lemond and Armstrong were a bit popular because the only way to watch the Tour back in the day was in tightly produced hour or two segments on the weekend. It was a very consumable format. Cycling nerds would buy the Famous Cycling Videos production vhs tape or dvd. Even those were only some hours, not the hundreds of hours of pedaling.
Regarding drug testing in MLB, the NFL, and the NBA - those players and organizations don’t have WADA and USADA looking over them. Those sports have a testing agreement with the players that is defined by contract. In most cases it is less comprehensive than Olympic/wada/usada testing and then penalties are usually slaps on the wrist. I’m only guessing but I’d bet that the testing thresholds are much more liberal than in cycling or Olympic sports. They aren’t bumping athletes over a tiny metabolite of this or that.
Also, the testing is mostly private between the organization and the players union. They only make an announcement if a player is suspended. How often is there some slap on the wrist deal that we never hear about? The NBA has a ‘confess, agree to monitoring, and get no penalty program’. They can dope until they get caught, then confess, and get no penalty. In general the NFL, NBA, and MLB want to make money not sanction their athletes. They have enough testing that drug use isn’t crazy and out of control but it’s a way lighter form of testing. We see how easy it was for cyclists to dope under a rigorous system so we can only imagine that players could get away with a lot. Also, it’s not a pure endurance sport so they don’t need to mess with blood bags or EPO.
3 Likes
Matt Beers is in the latest Paysons podcast and talking about WT difference (he was riding for UAE)
1 Like
If cycling were mainstream then top athletes in the US would be more likely to participate. Mainstream means viewership → advertising → huge salaries. That’s why salaries and higher in Europe and why NBA, MLB, and NFL salary are to the moon in US. Cycling being boring to watch isn’t an impediment to popularity. Take MLB for example. A 4-5hr stage of a race in Cycling is probably more exciting to watch than a baseball game or at least not any more boring.
Also, more directly on this thread, I think people are overestimating the value of US sponsorship deals. I would be shocked if the sum of all deals and prize money minus travel costs, etc end up equaling a net of around 100k for Keegan and other popular US domestic cyclists. People are saying cycling and gravel in particular are niche and not mainstream, while at the same time saying there are lucrative sponsorship deals with it. I bet the best gravel guys are making 50-60k usd with no benefits (health insurance, etc). The 40k in WT offers full benefits like a ‘good’ job in US. There is real value to that if you want to ride bikes for a living.
Whenever I’ve watched the TDF is just something on in the background. There’s very little that’s particularly exciting. I enjoy the downhill sections just to be amazed at how fast they go and seem to be on the verge of going off the edge of every corner.
I’ve never watched a MTB race but every time I see some highlights of a race all fans at the race are at some crazy technical section waiting for racers to crash.
The flat stages are generally a bore until the last 10k.
Anything with a mtn top finish, multiple hc climbs or where the GC guys are doing battle is pretty good TV, imho.
2 Likes
Historically, I’d generally agree with this (flat stages anyway) and I use a similar approach. Good napping material after a hard morning ride (watch the start and breakaway form, doze off and/or fast forward through the flat sections, etc.). I remember this year’s TdF being a big time suck because almost every day seemed to have stuff going on from start to finish. Most-see TV for me, but terribly boring for people who don’t understand the tactics/dynamics of bike racing (99.99% of the worlds population).
The American major sports also have powerful player unions that strictly control testing and punishment.
2 Likes