So why is 80% of the news about the 2006 TdF about him?!?! Leblanc is taking cheap shots at him, Bruyneel is p!ssed that there was so little screen time for him in the presentation, and apparently the route is an insult to him?

Why is anyone focusing on him? He's not riding the Tour next year, so how about we talk about why the Tour will be great without him? You know, maybe showcase the incredible talent that will be duking it out, highlight the new elements and old traditions that will be involved. It just seems to me that Leblanc is shooting himself in the foot while facing the challenge of recovering from the loss of the most enigmatic and recognizable personality in the sport today, and that Bruyneel is missing an opportunity to tout the chances of his Tour leader next year (Popo I assume?). Could we all just look forward and not back?

Sorry, I just had to rant. I feel better now.

You would hope everyone could be more forward thinking, but considering other recent statements, I don't think one should be surprised the Tour and the folks around it can't stop looking back like someone peed in their Le Wheaties.

I guess ultimately I'm not surprised, I'm just really annoyed. The loss of Lance means the loss of a lot of spectators (Americans at least), and I feel like they're really dropping the ball not making more of an effort to entice those spectators to stay. Rather than show them how great the Tour can still be without Lance, they're telling them how bad the Tour was with him. I guess we'll just have to wait for a Tour director who isn't anti-American.

You would hope everyone could be more forward thinking, but considering other recent statements, I don't think one should be surprised the Tour and the folks around it can't stop looking back like someone peed in their Le Wheaties.

I guess ultimately I'm not surprised, I'm just really annoyed. The loss of Lance means the loss of a lot of spectators (Americans at least), and I feel like they're really dropping the ball not making more of an effort to entice those spectators to stay. Rather than show them how great the Tour can still be without Lance, they're telling them how bad the Tour was with him. I guess we'll just have to wait for a Tour director who isn't anti-American.
I don't believe that he is so much, "anti-american" as he is pro french. I have no disillusions that if Jan Ullrich would have dominated the tour winning 7 in a row, that they would be treating him in a similar fashion. They said they didn't want him coming back for a 7th, my guess is because they wanted the record to be able to be broken more easily again, when another great rider rolled through the ranks, which has more to do with money than nationality.

Personally, I don't know why I'm still hearing about LA, I was looking forward to not having these sorts of childish battles, where the tour director says one thing, the LA feels the need to respond, and the petty bickering is played out in the public eye, but sadly it seems that we will have to deal with it for atleast one more year. Or perhaps LA and the tour director will just quiet down, and THIS will be the last we hear of this sort of thing.