The NFL’s Quarterback Revolution

It’s time to change your thinking about the prototypical NFL quarterback. In case you’ve been living under a rock with that Geico guy, the winds of change are blowing in the NFL, or is it the breeze of temporary fad? Hmmm…..good question.

Up here in Seattle there has been quite the hullabaloo made of a certain rookie quarterback named Rulssell Wilson. Coaches, media, fans, even his teammates just can’t seem to stop talking about this steely eyed rookie quarterback. I admit that even though I’m not much of a Seahawks fan, watching this kid develop throughout the year and going from a crawl before you walk newbie to a poised veteran with ice in his veins in a mere 16 games even drew me in.

But this story is far bigger than Russell Wilson. Wilson was part of a stable of rookie quarterbacks that perhaps has only been matched by the great QB class of 1983 that included legends Dan Marino and John Elway. As the season progressed all the talk in the NFL was focused on this impressive group othat included Russell Wilson, Robert Griffin the third (a/k/a RGIII), and Andrew Luck.

With all due respect to Andrew Luck, I’m going to politely kick him to the curb for the purposes of this post. Luck is an impressive young quarterback, but he hardly represents a revolution at the QB position. In fact, Luck compares very nicely to a long line of QB greats like Aaron Rodgers, the Borthers Manning, and Tom Brady. Instead I’d like to remove him from our triumvirate of quarterbacks and add in second year QB Colin Kaepernick from San Francisco.

Yes, the infamous running quarterback. But hold on a second. This ain’t your daddy’s running quarterback. We’re not talking Michael Vick or former Redskin Superbowl winner Doug Williams, or even Cam Newton. No. In fact, we’re not even talking about “running quarterbacks.” We’re talking about quarterbacks who can run. Semantics you say? Not at all. That sbutle difference means everything to the future of the NFL and more importantly, the defenses that have all off-season – or in the case of John Harbaugh and Ray Lewis about 10 days – to figure out how to stop them.

See, these guys appear to be able to do it all. They can drop back in the pocket and deliver 40 yard darts that would make Bill Walsh proud. They can roll out and throw accurately on the move going either direction. They can take a seven step drop and hit a 25 yard out route to the wide side of the field. And best of all, if you drop back in man and turn your back on them, they’ll gouge you for 20 yards faster than you can say QB speed is overrated.

To delve further into my point, I’m going to respectfully ignore RGIII. He may be the most talented of the three, but honestly I only saw him play two games at the end of the year (last home game versus Dallas and the playoff loss to Seattle) and by that time he was already injured so I never was able to see him at full strength.

I did, however, see Colin and RW play many times. In fact I watched every Seahawk game throughout the season and by the time triple zeroes appeared on the Atlanta game clock, I was ready to annoint Russell Wilson as the greatest thing since that little switch that makes the light come on every time you open the refrigerator.

You know, it takes a pretty dang good quarterback to make Aaron Rodgers look pedestrian. Yet, if you watched the divisional playoff game between San Francisco and Green Bay, that’s exactly what Colin Kaepernick did. Kaepernick’s arm strength is off the charts. The guy was dropping back and throwing frozen ropes 40 yards downfield and hitting Michael Crabtree on the chinstrap. And when he wasn’t doing that he was playing “where’s the football” and gashing the Green Bay defense for huge chunks of yards – and a few touchdowns to boot. 263 yards passing and 181 yards rushing. Are you kidding me??

Meanwhile Rusell Wilson was displaying his typical unflappable self in a come-from-behind road win against the Redskins and a why-are-there-still-30 seconds-left heartbreaking loss on the road against Atlanta. While Russell may not have the arm strength and raw speed of Kaepernick, his grey matter between the helmet holes is nothing short of spectacular for a rookie.

Already I’m hearing many NFL talking heads talking about how defenses will “catch up” to the option read play. And here’s where I think many people are missing the boat. First of all, sure, the defenses may “catch-up” with the option read play. Does that mean it’s obselete? Of course not! Have defenses caught up with 5 wide receiver formations? Sure. Yet it’st still an effective weapon.

Again, the difference is that these are quarterbacks that can drop back in the pocket and pass as well as anyone in the league. But they can also beat you with their feet. Why is this signiicant? Simple. The defense now has to account for everyone on the field.

The naysayers will point to the fact that Atlanta limited Kaepernick to only a couple carries and Colin didn’t hurt them with his feet. No, he didn’t. Do you konw why? Because they decided they weren’t going to let Kaepernick destroy them the way he did Green Bay. As a restult the defensive end was assigned Kaepernick come hell or high water. The result? Huge holes for running back Frank Gore who took handoff after handoff on the read option and pciked up 7 or 8 yards per carry.

Are Wilson, RGIII, and Kaepernick the new QB prototype? Not necessarily. There will still be plenty of traditional pocket passers in the league simply because the ability to pass and run like these three is so very rare. However, if you go back and watch that Green Bay – San Francisco game, or if you saw New England lose to Baltimore, who would you rather have at QB? Rodgers and Brady, or Kaepernick and Wilson? I know who I’d pick.

Sacramento Supersonics – Love ‘em or Leave ‘em??

Gary Payton bellies up to Michael Jordan in the 1996 NBA Finals.

So the Seattle Super-Thunder-Kings are coming back. An interesting side note, back in 1996 the Sonics had their backs against the wall yet again in the first round of the playoffs the year after being the first No. 1 seed to lose to a No. 8 seed. I still have the vision emblazened on my brain of Denver’s Dikembe Mutombo laying on the floor beneath the hoop, clutching the ball in his hands and emitting a primordal scream as the curtain fell on the Supersonics.

Jerk.

Anyway, the No. 1 seed Sonics were on the verge of going down 2-1 in a first round best of five but sharpshooter Hersey Hawkins nailed several clutch threes that ignited a gutsy 4th quarter come back to win the game, then the series and eventually go on to play Michael Jordan’s 72-10 Chicago Bulls in the NBA Finals. The victim of that first round comeback? That’s right, the Sacramento Supersonics. Which leads to my question: Who really won that game?? Was it the old Sonics or the new Sonics? If it was the new Sonics than that means that the Sacramento Supersonics both won AND LOST that playoff series! Shaking my head……

So the NBA is swept out of Seattle by our “Axis of Evil” Howard Shultz, Clay Bennet, and David Stern. We’re done with the NBA criminals that stole our team, right? Well, a funny thing happened. A Bay Area investor, Chris Hansen, that grew up in Seattle and was a huge Sonics fan, now wants to put together a plan to bring a team back to Seattle. And oh by-the-way, he’s already purchased land for a potential new arena in the district south of Seattle specifically zoned for sports stadiums. To boot, rather than come in and demand that the city build him a $500 million arena while he puts in a paltry $50 million, he turns the table and puts down $300 million of his own cabbage and guarantees the remaining $200 million will be repaid to the city through lease payments and as an afterthought puts it in writing that the team cannot be moved by him or any future owner for 30 years. To top it off, he assembles a “Who’s who” deep pocket ownership group of Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer and the Nordstroms.

Okay, I’m listening.

It’s still a long shot, but the plan sure looks good. Then low and behold he negotiates a sale agreement with the Sacramento Kings majority owners, the Maloof Brothers. So here’s where I strongly disagree with the notion that Seattle is doing to Sacramento what OK City did to us. Clay Bennett purchased the team with the promise to keep them in Seattle when he intended to move them to OK City, with Stern’s assistance, from day one. With investor Chris Hansen it has been clear that if he buys the team it’s moving to Seattle. No lies, no false promises, just an offer to purchase the team when all other negotiations between Sacramento and the Maloofs have failed.

To me it’s obvious that the Maloofs are the villains here and I feel bad that Sacramento had to deal with owner’s that have run a previously successful franchise into the ground and have peed all over any collaborative effort to build a new arena. But Hansen is no Clay Bennett.

Which leads to my delimma. Do I jump back in bed with Stern and the other greedy sons-of-mothers that stole the Sonics from under our collective nose? Or do I turn my back on Chris Hansen even though he has done everything in this deal to absolute perfection and has forked over a butt load of cash to bring the Sonics back to Seattle?

Sorry, Chris, but I can’t do it. I wish you the best and appreciate what you’re doing for our fine city, but until David Stern comes to Seattle and places himself in the stockade for three days while pining his penance 24 hours a day, I can’t support the NBA. I will watch some of the inaugural game just to hear NBA great Kevin Calabaro’s silky smooth play-by-play fill the airwaves once more. I still get goose bumps thinking of KC’s electric calls of Payton-to-Kemp lob Tomahawk jams. I’ll also tune in to see my fellow Beaver Gary Payton’s jersey retired in Seattle where it belongs. After that, I’m out. Sorry. Just can’t do it.

Meanwhile Sacramento will lament how their team was stolen. They’ll curse David Stern and the Maloofs and perhaps Chris Hansen, all while seeking out a potential owner that will partner on a new arena and perhaps purchase a team to relocate to Sacramento.

Same as it ever was……Same as it ever was.

Welcoming the Sacramento Supersonics – How did I get here?

I remember the first song I ever heard by the Talking Heads was Once In A Lifetime. A very strange song that caused me to have zero interest in their music. Turns out some of their stuff isn’t horribly awful after all and “Burning Down the House” is an okay song. But I just remember his odd spoken lyrics of “You may find yourself…in a beautiful house…with a beautiful wife…and you may ask yourself….My God, how did I get here??”

How did we get here indeed. Perhaps a more poingant line from that song is, “Same as it ever was….same as it ever was.”

So it appears that in the very near future, Seattle will be the beneficiary (or victim?)of the seedy underbelly of pro sports that makes me cringe from time to time. The tragic tale of the Seattle Supersonics turned Oklahoma City Thunder, which has turned Seattle basketball fans from sympathetic victims to villified plunderers, evokes a myriad of emotions. As a bit of an unemotional logic driven person, I feel compelled to sort through the emotional hyperbole and analyze what this means to our fine city.

But I can’t. See, to be honest, I’d really like to walk up to NBA Commisioner David Stern and kick him right in the….

I’m sorry, where was I? Oh yes, the Sacramento Supersonics. Naturally the outcries of an outraged Sacramento fanbase have carried northward on I-5 to reverberate off the small and horribly outdated pathetic excuse of a basketball venue that is Key Arena – tongue just slightly in cheek. Already the cries are loud and strong that Seattle is doing to Sacramento what OK City did to Seattle. Not so fast……

Let’s briefly revisit the circumstances that have set the stage for our current soap opera. Most will point the finger at current OK City Thunder owner/NBA relocation committe chairman/David Stern cronie and confident Clay Bennett. However, the dominoes that eventually fell all the way to OK City began to be set in place by popular Sonics owner Barry Ackerly. Ackerly pushed for the mid 90s renovation of the Seattle Coliseum to the tune of $100 million. Ackerly also intentionally limited the size of the new arena (subsequently named Key Arena) to be below the minimum threshold for an NHL hockey arena which eliminated Seattle as a potential landing site for an NHL franchise. Unfortunately this meant the remodeled Key Arena would be deemed woefully inadequate a mere 10 years later. Ackerly then sold to our first true villain of this story, Starbucks CEO Howard Shultz. Schultz oversaw the precipitous decline of the Sonics from the soaring heights of a tough NBA Finals loss to Michael Jordan in ’96, to a dreadful series of also-ran players, coaches and general managers.

Enter Clay Bennett.

Ring…..”Commisioner’s office.”

“Hi Claire, it’s Clay-Clay.”

“Hello Mr. Bennett. Are you calling for Mr. Stern?”

“Yes. The direct line is down, can you patch me through?”

Ring…..”Clay-Clay!!!”

“Hey D-Mish. How goes the empire?”

“Oh, I dunno Clay-Clay. We’re havin’ a tough time. Memphis can’t seem to find traction after leaving Vancouver, New Orleans is a disaster after Katrina, Charlotte 2.0 is failing miserably, gosh, it sure hurts having these teams move all over and losing established markets that have demonstrated a long history of supporing the leauge. So what’s up?”

“Yeah, about that. I think we’d like a team here in Oklahoma City.”

“You got it! I think Seattle might be for sale.”

“Sounds good. Let’s do it!”

“Okay, but do me a favor and pretend like you’re going to keep the team in Seattle. Then demand a luxurious arena that will cost almost $600 million and when Seattle refuses you’ll have an excuse to move to Okie City. Okay?”

“You got it ‘mish. Are you still coming to our Christmas sleepover?”

“No. Sorry Clay-Clay but I’m still working on our new letter for the NBA PLayer’s Union, ‘Tatoos, the First Amendment, and You.’ But I’m still planning on our Valentine’s Day dinner.”

And poof…..41ish years of basketball support in Seattle vanishes into the hot humid wasteland of Oklahoma City.

Honestly, I don’t mind that OK City got a team. I think they had demonstrated they could support a team and deserved a shot. But why Seattle? A team that, with the exception of a few down years here and there had shown rabid support of the Sonics and were an exemplary display of what an NBA market should be about. Why not the aforementioned and struggling franchises in New Orleans, Memphis, Charlotte, or Sacramento?

Of course Seattle fans were burned by Bennett’s claims to want to keep the team in Seattle when obviously that was never his intent. And by the way, Microsoft CEO Steve Balmer (part of new investor Chris Hansen’s ownership group) tried to make a valliant 11th hour save by purchasing the team from Bennett and investing in a major Key Arena overhaul that would have kept the Sonics in Seattle. But by then Bennett had a foot in OK City and the team was not for sale. Where was Balmer back when Schultz was selling the team a couple years prior?

In short, Seattle was screwed. We’ll never support the NBA again!!! Screw David Stern!! Screw Clay Bennett! We don’t want you…we don’t need you!

Well…I mean, I don’t think we want you back….I dunno, maybe if you ask nicely we’ll think about it……hmmm, more on that tomorrow.

Coming Clean

Taking a late lunch and figured I owed it to the blog (and the few people that actually read it) to provide some immediate feedback on the Armstrong confession.

Honestly I didn’t plan on watching it, but around 9:30 last night I realized he’d be right in the middle of it so I turned it on to see what Lance had to say. I must admit I was pretty rivited with the situation and plan on watching part 2 as well. I expect to have a more detailed reaction after watching part two, but wanted to share some immediate thoughts.

It was also interesting that my blog had quite a few hits in the last couple of days and they were all from Europe, mostly Italy and England. Interesting.

I’ve heard a lot of negativity about the inteview, criticisms that Oprah was too soft, that Lance didn’t seem contrite, etc. I don’t know. I feel differently I guess. I’ve seen LOTS of interviews of Lance Armstrong since he emerged onto the cycling scene in the early 90s. This is a man who was absolutely consumed by winning at all costs who has spent the last 15 or so years vehemently denying that he ever took PEDs. So sure, the jig is up, he’s caught, stripped of his victories, etc., but do you really expect him to flip flop 100% immediately and go from adamant denials to confessing every last detail and implicating dozens (if not hundreds) of riders, suport staff, coaches, and doctors?

Newsflash: Lance Armstrong has a BIG ego! You don’t win the Tour de France seven consecutive times without having a huge ego and being highly focused and motivated with an enormous determination to crush anyone and anything that stands in your path to victory. Remember when the Fonse from Happy Days couldn’t say “sorry”? I remember one episode – that I probably watched while I was home sick from school – where he tried to apologize and it came out, “I’m s-s-s-s-s…..I’m s-s-s-s-s-….” He couldn’t do it. To me it looked like Lance was about to fracture his teeth from clenching his jaw so tightly as he finally admitted what he has so vigorously denied in the last 15 years.

Was last night’s confession adequate in and of itself? No. Not by a long shot. But did it maybe open the door for him to begin telling the true story of what happened? Can he now begin a process where he literally and figuratively comes clean to anti-doping authorities, cycling fans, and cancer survivors? Can he begin to humble himself before the people he so viciously maligned because they dared suggest Lance was doping? I hope so. At least, I’m willing to give him time to do so. If this is it and he runs and hides, his tarnished reputation will remain forever. But if he makes a real attempt to right a HUGE buttload of wrongs, I’m willing to wait and see how it plays out.

Finally, I think all of us sports fans need to take a long look at ourselves and perhaps our frequent hypocrisy in what we glorify and what we condemn. As I mentioned above, you don’t win the Tour de France seven times without being willing to do ANYTHING it takes to succeed. How can we, as sports fans, glofiy Lance Armstrong’s achievements on the bicycle without recognizing that that type of focus and determination is likely going to cause some collateral damage. Does this excuse his behavior? Of course not. But as we watch an elite athlete achieve such lofty status we have to remember that in glorifying the achievement and the person, we have to expect there to be some less than exemplary baggage that goes along for the ride.

I used to be super critical of NFL players that would do little dances and “hey look at me – I just made a sack” celebrations, or guys that would talk smack, etc. However, part of the reason Americans love the NFL is because it is a very intense physical game. The level of strength, power, focus, and bravado required to play at that level is remarkable. I realized as a fan I couldn’t expect these guys to go out and literally be like crazed animals between the lines without accepting that that emotion will spill over into some trash talking, jawing, look-at-me celebrations, etc.

I can’t help but respect the competitiveness of a guy like the Seattle Seahawk’s Richard Sherman. Sure, I’d rather he just go out and play without all the talking and jawing. But if that’s what it takes to fuel his emotion and allow him to compete at such a high level, I can harldy celebrate his athletic achievement and then turn around and condemn the emotional fire that drives that achievement.

How can I be a fan of cycling?

Are you kidding?? How can I NOT be a fan of cycling? It’s got everything! It’s got the competitive drama of the Super Bowl, the beauty of France (and other countries) like a great travel show, and the incredible melodrama of Sami and Austin in the hey day of “Days of Our LIves” (don’t ask me how I know that one). This is good stuff!

As a side note, you’ll notice I sitll have the now disgraced Lance Armstrong as the header photo on my blog. I plan on keeping it that way (for now) because I can’t think of a better representation of the excitement, endurance, drama, and intrigue that is professional cycling.

On the doping front, there’s been lots of talk about potential corruption by cycling’s governing body the UCI (Union Cyclistes International - it’s French for International Cycling Union). Many writers and bloggers (there’s a good blog called Velo Voices – much better than mine) were very disappointed with the UCI’s attempt to sweep the whole Armstrong affair away without embracing the need for systematic change. Greg LeMond issued a scorching letter on his Facebook page that condemns the UCI’s contributing to a doping culture.

I also mentioned yesterday that the UCI’s defamation case against journalist Paul Klimmage may be an interesting avenue to get a lot of evidence from the Armstrong case out in the open. I also speculated that the UCI will drop the case and will not want this evidence brought out in the courtroom. Well, surprise surprise, guess who suspended the Klimmage case today pending an independent review of UCI’s handling of controversial issues in the recent past? How convenient.

Another popular subject lately is the zero tolerance approach to doping, past or present that teams like Team Sky are taking. This was brought to the forefront yesterday with Bobby Julich’s doping confession and subsequent firing. The biggest problem with this approach is that it encourages all parties involved to keep silent. This “Omerta” code of silence just encourages everyone to walk around with their dirty little secrets rather than bring things out in the open and try and learn from the mistakes of the past. I much prefer the approach that Johnathon Vaughters, a confessed doper himself, is taking. Who better to lead the fight against doping than someone who experienced the culture and effects of doping in the 90s and early 00s and wants to eliminate the culture that caused him to submit to doping in the first place.

The reactions from riders has been telling as well. Some have tried to defend Armstrong and say he is being victimized. Others, like sprinter Marcel Kittel have lashed out at riders that have suggested that Armstrong was treated unfairly.

“I feel SICK when I read that Contador, Sanchez & Indurain still support Armstrong. How does someone want to be credible by saying that?!” Kittel tweeted, following recent pro-Armstrong comments made by the three Spaniards in the press.

I’ve maintained for a long time that the only way cycling can be relatively clean is if the riders themselves commit to riding clean and call out other riders when they see evidence of doping. Many riders are continuing to be very outspoken against doping, but far too many are clinging to regurgitated quotes and the same old stories, almost as if they’ve looked around at their glass houses and decided not to throw stones.

Another doping confession….and a diversion from the Armstrong 3-ring circus

People are actually reading my blog! WHOA! Well, they’re at least clicking on the pages long enough to realize that this blog is absolute rubbish…but hey, I’ll take it!

If people are reading and there’s still plenty to talk about, might as well keep it going.

Today’s news includes a doping confession by now retired American cyclist Bobby Julich. Julich was a talented cyclist in the late 90s and early 00s. He finished third in the 1998 Tour de France (the year before Lance vacated his first Tour) and was seen as a rising star in cycling.

A little background:  Team Sky continues to crow about being a clean team (I really want to believe them, but for some reason Slipstream has greater credibility to me…perhaps it’s just my US bias, or perhaps its because Slipstream didn’t just dominate the Tour in a very USPS fashion – and by the way, I HATE that every single great performance I see will now cause me to assume that rider is doping).. So Team Sky is requiring all of their managers and athletes to sign a no-doping pledge and are currently having one-on-one interviews with everyone to clear up any doping involvement in their history.

So Bobby Julich came clean and admitted to doping during his racing career. As a result he was fired from Team Sky (as he knew he would be) and has made public his doping activities. Julich claims to have taken EPO from ’96 to ’98 due to the widespread use and the feeling that he couldn’t be successful without it. Evidently his fiance (and now wife) said something like, “Oh no you didn’t!” and he decided he’d rather be married than be a cycling champion.

It’s interesting to look back on his results and correlate them with his doping. His biggest result was the third place Tour finish in ’98 – according to him the last year he took EPO. In ’99 he was considered a pre-race favorite, but abandoned the race after crashing hard early on. Even though he was considered a favorite, he had to know he had no chance against an EPO laced peloton. After that I vividly remembered that he never achieved the same level of success as he did in ’98. I assumed it was becuase he got older oer perhaps his ’98 result was a fluke. Now we know better.

One other item of interest, I’ve stated previously that the Armstrong affair is far from over and that some very interesting testimony may come out during Johna Bruyneel’s appeal of USADA’s lifetime ban. (Side not to my side note:  I wonder if Bruyneel will simply appeal that USADA has no jurisdiction over him since he’s not an American….considering he was director for a US based team I can’t imagine that argument would hold much weight.)

Another opportunity for some very damaging testimony to come to light is the defamation lawsuit brought by the UCI against cycling journalist Paul Klimmage. Klimmage had the audacity to call the UCI corrupt. He did this because…..well, because they are corrupt, but the UCI doesn’t like it when you call them names. (Crap…now I’ll be a co-defendant because I just called the UCI corrupt. Don’t tell!)

I ask you this, how would you prove that your accusation that the UCI is corrupt is not defamation? Well, I think I’d try to demonstrate that there is evidence that the UCI is corrupt. The USADA investigation unearthed mountains of evidence that is now public record and can be used in this legal proceeding. However, USADA was limited because they could not subpeona. In fact the whole reason USADA was successful is because so many riders were subpeonad as part of the Federal Grand Jury investigation of fraud by Armstrong , thus compelling the riders to testify against Lance. The case was dropped, but the testimony is still there. So now the USADA can go to the riders and say, tell you what. We know you testified in the grand jury proceedings so you have a choice: Provide the same testimony to us, or be brought to trial for lying under oath. Up to you. They chose to give the same testimony.

Now, imagine what the USADA – or perhaps Klimmage’s legal team – could do with the power of subpeona. That will be VERY interesting. And if the defamation case is suddenly dropped, that’s all the evidence we need to confirm that the fox is indeed guarding the henhouse.

2013 Tour de France Route

As I look out my window to see fall colors, dark clouds, and wet pavement, July sure seems a long ways away….and unfortunately it is. But hey, a wise friend of mine once said the secret to happiness is having something to look forward to.

Well, I now have something to look forward to and am happy to take a break from the Lance Armstrong doping scandal to focus on what drew me to the sport 22 years ago, the magnificent Tour de France.

I’ll have a more detailed analysis of the route next June, but wanted to hit a few of the highlights. First off, the 2013 Tour is visiting several of my favorite places in France, including Mount Saint Michel (been there twice and the second trip in 2011 was perhaps the highlight of our family vacation), Tours (where my French friends live), Alpe d’Huez (had a fantastic time there watching the Tour in 2006), and Annecy (again, had a great time there watching the Tour in 2004).

Some highlights of this year’s route:

- The course appears to be fairly balanced with a team time trial and two individual time trials, although none of the time trials are very long, and several summit finishes.

- The first individual time trial (Stage 11) finishes at beautiful Mt. Saint Michel.

- Incredibly famous and incredibly difficult Mt. Ventoux will be climbed at the finish of Stage 15 just before the 2nd rest day.

- The route will include the ascent of Alple d’Huez….TWICE…..in the SAME STAGE! Think crowds will be big for that one??

- The arrival on the Champs Elysees will be right around sunset and the race will finish under the lights. Equally important, the route will include the round about that goes around the Arc de Triomphe. Typically the route does a 180 on the Champs Elysees just before the Arc but this year will go around it. I’ve always thought it would be cool do go around the Arc but assumed traffic difficulties would make it impractical. One thing I love about France is they don’t really care if it’s impractical…provided it showcases their beautiful countries. Don’t like the bad traffic from closing roads for the Tour de France?? Tough! It makes our country look good so go whine somewhere else.

The full route map can be found here:  www.letour.fr

The route begins with three stages in Corsica. This could be interesting because Corsica is a tiny little island (meaning not a lot of population) and the Tour may overwhelm the island. The route then hops across the Mediterannean for a short team time trial in Nice. A few flat stages across the south coast brings us to our first mountain rendezvous at stage 8.

Day one of the Pyrenees – Stage 8

Clearly a flat stage, but a couple nasty climbs at the end will, including the final ascent to Ax 3 Domaines definitely send the non-climbers tumbling down the classification.

Stage 9 includes a typical Pyreneean saw blade type stage profile with many difficult climbs including the Peyresourde on the “difficult” side…as if there’s an easy side. However, it’s not a mountain top finish so I won’t post the profile. You can find it on the Tour de France website.

An airplane transfer then sends us to northern Brittany and Normandy, including the aforementioned Stage 11 time trial to Mt. Saint Michel. Several transition stages take us diagonally across the center of France (although I believe they mostly skirt to the north of the very hilly Massif Central) before stage 15 delivers the riders to the nasty climb of Mt. Ventoux.

Stage 15 – The Giant of Provence, Mt. Ventoux

A rest day is followed by a fairly flat jaunt to Gap before the Tour victor is finally decided in the Little Shopr of Horrors that is the Alps. Stage 18 will be the featured stage of the 2013 Tour de France with two ascents of Alpe d”Huez.

Alpe d’Huez – the cilmb so nice they climbed it twice.

Two more Alpine stages will cause plenty of pain in the legs, but I think the victor will have been decided on the slopes of Alpe d’Huez. A plane transfer then takes us to Versailles for the historic sunset ride into the City of Light.

There will be plenty of time to analyze the route and I don’t think we can comment on which riders will be favored by this route until we see what kind of form riders carry into the late spring season. Although it’s worth noting that Bradley Wiggins has confirmed that he will focus on the Giro d’Italia this year and will likely be riding in support of another Team Sky rider at the Tour de France – likely Chris Froome.

Ultimately the riders make the race in the Tour de France. To me the route is like a good canvas for a painting. It provides the vehicle for the racing, if you will, but ultimately the riders will determine if it’s a good route or not.

Overall I think it’s very difficult for the Tour organizers to come up with a route that is interesting without being gimmicky and does not favor one type of rider over another. Upon first glance I think they’ve been successful with presenting interesting terrain to be the backdrop of three weeks of suffering…..hopefully without illegal performance enhancers!

Just 247 days ’till Le Grand Boucle rides again!