Why does the pro peloton fall down so much?

Today in the New York Times, Juliet Macur inadvertently makes the connection between doping and the modern-day unskilled cyclist. Point being that cycling is a sport of raw physical power and endurance--any idjit can do it as soon as he's off training wheels, and on the EPO. But a "finesse" sport like baseball requires more than elevated levels of testosterone, or stratospheric hematocrit.

Whether scandals, if they blossom, eventually harm baseball as they have cycling is a complicated question, in part because of the differences in the two sports. Success in cycling, in particular, depends on strength and endurance. Drugs are more likely to make a crucial difference... By contrast, he went on, baseball is “a multiskilled sport” that can certainly be enhanced by drugs, but only by so much.

So maybe pro cyclists are less "skilled" than other athletes. But are they less skilled than pro cyclists of previous generations?

Also this: Do they have bigger muscles nowadays, or does it just seem that way?

If you know the answers to these important questions, send them right now!