I feel that the firing pattern of the different groups (front squat) is a bit more appropriate given the general recruitment pattern during the power phase of the pedal stroke. I do like oly back squats a lot, but find that front squats have an edge on quad development and to me the general trunk position during hip extension is slightly more tailored to the trunk position during hip extension in a circa maximal cycling effort. I'd use both for track riders or short-duration riders that simply need all out development.
As for Good Mornings it again comes down to what type of rider you're training, but I find them to be one of the best glute, trunk, and posterior chain movement there is and they come with the added benefit of not recruiting as much upper back muscles as a RDL or deadlift. For a short duration track rider this doesn't matter, but for a road cyclist or track enduro rider that is convinced they need weights it, to me, has the added benefit of not incurring as much potential recruitment and hypertrophy of upper body muscles that aren't necessary while still working on hip extension power.
Lastly, both movements are extremely easy to teach IMO and most trainees seem to have an easier time adapting to proper front squat form than back squat form. For some reason most people take a really long time to get proper back squat and oly squat form and since this part of the season is limited only taking 1-3 sessions to get proper front squat form down is better than taking twice as long to get back squat form down especially since back squat strength is more commonly limited by posterior chain development, which many road cyclists do not necessarily have and need as much. Again for track riders its much different. While I and most strength coaches I've known over the years in the US are not fans of Rippetoe (he really doesn't produce much), I do agree with him that some of the basic power movements are a great starting point.
As for loading patterns and volumes I see it less as % of 1RM and more of total set duration. If an athlete needs maximal power then they're going target a multitude of systems, one primary system being the initial creatine phosphate system. I've found that limiting the total set duration to under 15 seconds (pretty easy), keeping the repetitions within 80% of 1 RM, and simply using total volume to manipulate load makes more sense to transfer to that specific on the bike goal. On the bike I've seen doing what I call sprint starts (high cadence of 100-105 rpm, 5 10s quick spin outs/jumps every minute for 5 minutes) work well in tandem since they target the same system, but repeatability instead of overall gross capacity. For those that feel (again I'm not 100% sure if this is even proven) that NM recruitment is their issue, doing timed sets under of 30s-120s of duration, circuits, etc and then immediately jumping on a stationary bike and doing 30s-120s power stomps at a low cadence (as well as doing them on the road) has seemed to had positive qualitative results from the riders I know that have done them. My sample size is low, but before cycling I spent years working with elite powerlifting coaches, olympic lifters (that are on the olympic level), pro strongmen, and many Division 1 strength and endurance coaches and have transferred the way they use specificity the best I can to cycling.
I'm not sure its always the right solution nor am I sure that it works for every cyclist because my sample size is low, but those that have employed a lifting plan like this (they requested it, I did not) did see very positive gains in neuromuscular strength, sprint power, and snap (using microbursts as a test) which was the goal. I feel that its incredibly risky, however, because so many road riders could spend the time working on FTP or doing on-the-bike work. The riders that benefitted from such workouts last season were all former swimmers or cross country runners in high school/college and already had very developed FTPs and aerobic systems, but almost 0 strength which was proving to be a limiter on really steep climbs, at the end of punchy crits, and power from 15s-30s.
I'm still not convinced lifting is the answer for enduro and road riders, but found that using specificity and energy systems to guide the training made more sense than following traditional programs adapted from strength sports and athletics. Those sports are heavily limited by muscular strength and power and those athletes generally move for 5s to 20s max and then rest/recover for another 5 minutes or so. No sense in training a cyclist like you would a running back.
Don't take me too seriously. The only person that doesn't hate