pro cycling question...

is johan bruyneel really that great of a team manager, or is everybody claiming that he is great because of lance? lance goes on to win seven tours, but is that really because of bruyneel? or was bruyneel just in the right place at the right time? sure he came up with new ways to train and things to look at for riding, but what did he really do? i make a parallel to coach jackson; he used to coach the bulls, that happened to have jordan on the team. now would that team have won as much as they did without jordan? no. the team was good, but jordan was the man, just like lance was the man. without jordan, jackson isn't that great, and neither is bruyneel. a great manager will win at any cost. but bruyneel is not doing that. he went into this year's tour without any direction. an 'experiment' as he called it in a interview. well, the 'experiment' that he had going for seven years was lance. a team built around one 'player.' i believe his fault this year was not building a team around one 'player.' he has some great cyclist on his team- azevedo, hincapie, popovych, savoldeli. all great cyclist, but there is no one leader, and without a head the body will die, and that is just what has happened to team discovery. bruyneel is just like jackson without jordan...just a regular manager trying to figure out how to win. there never seemed to be a game plan...just go out and ride, and see what happens. lance trained for the tour all year. focused on it. said to everyone else on the team you are here for him, period. they didn't have that this year. thus the implosion. until they step up and state here is our team leader, we will ride for him, they will just be another team in the tour. not a great team.