...I'm sure that if it was put to the professional cyclist in the correct way, i.e. the way they are used to: you will be paid at least as much as you would get from your normal activities and compensation for lost earnings while you recover and you will have a back-up team, then some of them might easily beat Tommy's figure - by a huge margin....
The only slight problem with that is... is that per year, or per hour spent cycling??
If it was the former, they might think they were getting a rough deal because they're spending 15 hours a day in the saddle, every day.
If I was offered a job where I was paid the same amount but expected to spend my entire waking life devoted to it I would probably leave (this in fact
did happen, and I
did leave fairly rapidly, but that's another story)
Let's say an average pro cyclist does 80 days racing a year average 4 hours each - 320 hours. Also assume they get a fairly modest £100k per year - nothing like the 7 figure sums the big names like Froome or Wiggins get.
Scaling this up to what they would want to do the HAMR which is 365x15 = 5,475 hours. This is a factor of 5475/320 = ~17, which means even only an average pro cyclist would be needing to get paid £1.7m a year to contemplate it.
Where are they going to get that from?
If you wanted Froome to do it, who gets £3m anyway, you'd need to be forking out £50m.