The revelations of the past few days have my head spinning.

First came rumors and then confirmation that seven-time Tour de France champion Lance Armstrong plans a comeback to professional cycling with the intent of trying to win his eighth TdF title, at age 37, four years removed from his seventh … with only a few marathons and a mountain bike race in the interim.

Then, today, cyclingnews.com reports that 2006 Tour de France champ Floyd Landis will be back in the saddle next year with what is now the Health Net-Maxxis squad but next year will apparently be rebranded under sponsorship by Smith & Nephew, makers of Landis’ artificial hip.

In the wake of these reports, I half expect Greg LeMond to announce his comeback in the coming days, sponsored by whatever company buys his bike brand after the acrimonious breakup of the partnership between him and Trek.

Dude’s pushin’ 50, but like his L brothers, he has more than enough anger and resentment as motivation to turn the pedals in anger.

OK, I’m being ridiculous, but only about LeMond riding again.

As for Lance and Landis, I have mixed feelings, and actually (and perhaps oddly) I have a more favorable reaction to Landis’ comeback than Armstrong’s.

For one, I have the (perhaps irrational) belief that Landis won the 06 Tour de France “fair and square” as he said he did, never mind the purported finding of exogenous testosterone in his B sample(s), the loss of his arbitration case and the loss of his appeal to the Court of Arbitration for Sports, which amounted to a serious smackdown of Landis and his lawyers I might add. (I do find it quite odd that all of the arbitrators in his first case, which he lost 2-1, took the French lab to task for its errors, while CAS arbitrators seemed to have no problem with the lab whatsoever.) The system tried and convicted Landis, though I still want to believe the Mennonite from Lancaster County wouldn’t lie to his Mom by telling her didn’t do it.

Also, I’m impressed that the hip-joint people have stuck with Landis through the whole process, so they obviously believe in him too. Furthermore, Landis won the 06 Tour de France with a hip joint that was basically dead, with bone grinding on bone as he was grinding the gears throughout France. Dude suffered, and taking away the TdF title doesn’t erase the pain and suffering he went through to get it. Nobody ever talks about that.

As for Armstrong, I think he’s been gone too long from competitive cycling and is setting himself up for failure. I see a Michael Jordan-esque comeback re: the Washington Wizards’ Era, as opposed to Jordan’s comeback to three more titles with the Bulls. Riding the Tour de France is different than training to swim 50-meters as 41-year-old Dana Torres did in the Olympics. More power to him if he can do it, but I have my doubts. (Reading this type of thing motivates Lance, so all I have to say is … you’re welcome, Tex!)

While Armstrong’s stated reason to return is to turn his LIVESTRONG brand into an international cancer-fighting juggernaut, I figure he could have done that without returning to the bike. Dude still has plenty of cachet as a seven-time TdF winner, a cancer survivor and Sheryl Crow/celebrity babe dater.

So, the amateur psychologist in me thinks his deeper motivation is that he’s sick and tired of the doping accusations that have dogged him throughout his career and in his retirement, too. With cycling well  into the anti-doping era, I’d venture to guess Armstrong doesn’t want to be the face of the doping era, in which most if not all of his major competitors have been implicated (Jan Ullrich) or have served suspensions (Ivan Basso, Tyler Hamilton, Landos, Alexander Vinokourov) for doping. 

I think Armstrong wants to prove his seven titles were legit by winning one in the anti-doping era, when testing is more sophisticated. But the problem is that even if he wins, it won’t definitively prove he didn’t dope before, just that he didn’t dope this time. And if he fails, people will suggest it was because he didn’t dope this time around.

I don’t think Armstrong can win either way, so why bother? The odds certainly are against him, but as we know, he’s beaten the odds before by beating cancer, so I wouldn’t necessarily bet against him.

The troubling aspect of the return of Lance and Landis is that it draws attention away from the present day stars of American cycling — the lads from Team Columbia and Garmin-Chipotle, who are now the face of American cycling and leaders in the anti-doping movement. Defending Tour of Missouri winner Big George Hincapie, Armstrong’s former lieutenant, now may be the most popular cyclist in the U.S. Garmin’s Christian Vande Velde, now in the yellow jersey and probably Hincapie’s successor as ToM champ, has risen to prominence. Youngsters such as Danny Pate and Will Frischkorn are rising stars, and I think cycling in America has never been better or healthier from a financial standpoint.

But then again, Armstrong, and perhaps Landis to a lesser extent, will draw interest from the noncycling crowd, and perhaps that’ll mean more exposure, more sponsorship dollars and more opportunities for young American cyclists down the road, which isn’t a bad thing at all. And if they inspire their respective constituents — cancer victims and, uh, hip-replacement candidates – and drive research efforts as well, all the better.

And if LeMond comes back and wins a U.S. Masters title and inspires for us old guys, then we’ll really be rockin’!

–30–