Jumbo-Visma Manages to Overcome "Adversity;" Did the Media Influence Vuelta Outcome? What is Really Happening at NCL? New Life for the UCI Points Ranking?
Key Takeaways:
● Jumbo-Visma “Overcomes Adversity” at the Vuelta
● Did Social Media Control the Outcome?
● What’s Actually Happening at the NCL?
● Breathing Life into the UCI Points Ranking
● Lessons from Professional Tennis
● The Decline in American and British Road Racing
By now, everyone knows that Sepp Kuss and his Jumbo-Visma team completely swept the record books on Sunday, becoming the first team to win all three grand tours in a season, and setting all kinds of other personal and team records in the process. Social media and the endemic cycling media were veritably buzzing all week with the compelling story of J-V’s sweep of the podium, and the highly emotionally charged quandary around how to manage three of the world’s top riders going head-to-head within a single team. Team Principal Richard Plugge described it, after the fact, as “having to decide between your children.” The monumental achievement of this grand tour sweep, with the widely-popular Kuss trouncing the sport’s best riders not in his own team wove a storybook narrative for Jumbo, and the team’s well-orchestrated shows of unity at the end of stages 18, 20, and 21 have generally succeeded in burying the team’s embarrassment and near implosion on stage 17, when public opinion turned sharply against them.
Nothing underlines Jumbo’s current dominance over the sport more than the unique, complicated and highly nuanced conundrum the team faced this past week: whether to ride conservatively and deliver their key domestique a major against many of the biggest young GC stars in the sport or let their two superstars duke it out for the win should Kuss falter – with a podium sweep guaranteed either way. Few teams have ever faced that sort of enviable but still highly confusing set of circumstances. The optics of the team’s multiple stars – almost openly fighting through the final week – was uncomfortable and almost jarring to watch, especially given the palmares and general popularity of the three riders. But it is important to remember that the sport’s unwritten rules – you never attack a teammate, especially one in the race lead – just weren’t created for the kind of situation we saw last week, or applicable to a dominant team like Jumbo-Visma.
All corners of the cycling media world (and beyond) weighed in with criticism, advice or outright anguish over how the situation should have been handled. Many pundits proudly claimed that it was only the harsh media scrutiny and commentary mid-week that brought the team back to its senses, and facilitated the unity (at least on the surface) of the closing days. As usual, the media feedback was immediate, intense, and highly opinionated, but in this instance it often seemed uninformed or purely speculative. We’ll wait for the dust to settle a few more days before opining further on the outcome, the team’s roster, schedule or likely fortunes for next year. One thing is clear: Richard Plugge (along with key lieutenants Merijn Zeeman and Grischa Niermann) has built a juggernaut in a few short years with an embarrassment of riches that has rarely, if ever, been seen before in cycling – but one supported by a mature business structure. The decisions and challenges faced by the team last week were unique and never before seen “no-win” situations that were sure to alienate some corners of the sport. However, the team had all the right tools to minimize the internal disruptions and maximize its public image.
In light of USA Cycling’s recent announcement that its new strategic vision will see it focus and double-down on identifying and nurturing top-end talent, it’s notable that both of these last two American riders to win a grand tour, Kuss and Chris Horner, were not developed inside USA Cycling’s talent-identification pipeline, but instead developed and honed their skills by rising through the ranks with grassroots local and domestic U.S. racing. Kuss raced collegiately at the University of Colorado and domestically with the amateur Gateway Harley-Davidson program before being noticed by Jonas Carney’s Rally team, now HPH. He soon signed on with Jumbo-Visma (then LottoNL-Jumbo) after a strong ride on Stage 5 at the 2017 Tour of California (a massively important race for U.S. rider development that no longer exists). This is something for USA Cycling stakeholders to consider when attempting to map out the best way to develop top-tier talent that can compete and win at the sport’s top level.
It might seem apparent that Jumbo is the strongest team in the sport with its sweep of 2023’s grand tours, but they are nevertheless currently in a hotly contested battle for the top spot on the UCI rankings with rival team UAE. (UAE is currently ahead, though Jumbo will likely overtake them when the standings are refreshed on Tuesday morning.) And, while these rankings are normally seen as a sidelight that only the most dedicated fans pay attention to, the two teams are rumored to be paying very close attention to these standings. Indeed, they seem to be sending riders to races specifically to rack up UCI points, in turn increasing their chances of winning the points rankings. The fact that UAE is still sending top riders like Tadej Pogačar to low-profile late-season one-day races like the recent Gran Premio città di Peccioli - Coppa Sabatini, and that they raced in a manner their UCI points at the Vuelta, are very interesting examples of this rivalry beginning to have a real impact on racing.
While the reasons for the heated points battle between these two teams aren’t exactly clear (outside of ego and bragging rights), it is very refreshing to see two top teams caring about and contesting the UCI points standings late in the season, considering cycling has struggled so mightily through the years in fostering and creating a season-long narrative. The UCI should definitely try to capitalize on this and highlight the battle, and should consider offering real incentives (e.g., cash rewards, extra roster spots, early access to the next season’s Grand Tour routes, first car position in the race caravan next year, etc.) in order to create as much public awareness and attention around the battle as possible.
There have been continuing and conflicting stories around the status and direction of the emerging National Cycling League (NCL) – with endemic media sites quick to predict its ultimate demise. While the league cut a number of its riders last week, it simultaneously announced plans to add a new Atlanta-based team, and to sign up new racers for existing teams and an expanded calendar for next year. So, perhaps it’s no wonder that observers have been scratching their heads – trying to figure out what’s going on with the start-up cycling venture, or what their actual revenue model is.
Founder Paris Wallace and CEO Andrea Pagnanelli told The Outer Line that the league is healthy and robust and is simply trying to iterate towards a more sustainable model going forward. “Despite commentary in the cycling media, we’re not falling apart. We learned a few things in our first season, and we’re just trying to adapt and modify our direction accordingly.” In particular, the NCL is trying to address one of the key weaknesses in the legacy cycling business model – the difficulties of establishing a critical regional fan base. “We sort of tried to build a WorldTour-type team this year, and we’ve realized we need to have more local riders, to gradually build that local interest. We can’t do it with 50% foreign riders, some of whom don’t even speak English.”
There is generally zero overlap between the endemic cycling media and the investment community, which is likely one of the reasons there is so much confusion. Cycling is typically funded by a rich guy (or company) who writes a check, until he decides not to. On the other hand, says Wallace, “We’re a business, we have a plan, we have to achieve profitability. And we have a pool of experienced investors who understand that we’re still a start-up – that we’re going to make changes as we go.” Adds CEO Pagnanelli, ”We’ve both seen this movie before; we’re just applying time-tested principles from other sports, and making sure that we pivot quickly, to continue improving the product.” Wallace is an experienced entrepreneur with a number of successful “exits” under his belt, while Pagnanelli is a veteran marketing executive and entrepreneur with deep experience in other sports.
Despite the exciting U.S. Open, which concluded last week with historic victories by Novak Djokovic and Coco Gauff, it is well-documented that the business of tennis has been struggling for years. “Tennis may appear to be on a roll, with exciting young players and record ratings. But if it were a company, activist shareholders would have already called for a restructuring.” Although generally not understood by fans, the sport actually consists of a large number of largely independent entities – the U.S. Tennis Association, the Women’s Tennis Association (WTA), and a number of tournament events which are operated independently. This splintered structure makes scheduling and day-to-day operations more difficult, and critically, diminishes the sport’s bargaining power regarding sponsorship and media contracts. Sound familiar?? Now, there are indications that Saudi Arabia’s powerful sovereign wealth fund – PIF – which has already invested in (taken over?) several other sports, may be interested in tennis. The sports-heavy private equity firm CVC Capital recently made an investment in the WTA, and rumors in the financial world suggest that some sort of consolidation play could be imminent. Despite its global popularity, tennis brings in only 1.3% of total sports media rights earnings, according to the New York Times’s Dealbook. Change is imminent and could also prove instructive for the future of women’s cycling.
Contraction of the U.S. cycling road scene has been well documented over the last few years, with fewer total events on the calendar and the lack of a premier UCI-calendar stage race like the defunct Tour of California. The situation is now remarkably similar and dour for another cycling powerhouse, Great Britain. There are similar factors in the crisis on both sides of the pond: higher organizational costs, difficulties in securing a title sponsor, lack of paid television distribution, and municipal costs – including road closures and the negotiations to have roads repaired. The Tour of Britain fell £3 million short of its budget needs in 2023, and the extremely popular and well-received women’s event was canceled altogether. While the organizer hopes to have title sponsorship secured and the women’s race back in 2024, nothing is guaranteed. A task force was announced by British Cycling to survey the landscape and recommend changes that would be implemented in 2024 and future years to “revive” the country’s beleaguered road scene. This mirrors work being done in USA Cycling to get American cycling up to speed again. While it’s true that more consumers are spending disposable income on high end bicycles and riding for fitness, pleasure, and club camaraderie, there seem to be pervasive disconnects between race organizers, national governing bodies, and sources of funding to support more racing and bigger events.