SI Covers

[dl]

Re: SI Covers

My university had bound volumes of all the back issues of SI. I went through every single one. Amazing how much track coverage their used to be. It's definitely part of a chicken-and-egg problem, but I believe firmly that if something receives a lot of coverage, people will consider it important. If SI still had a track article in every or every other issue like they used to from January-June, our sport would be a lot more popular.

[dj]

Re: SI Covers

I think SI responded to changes in their market. They recognized that stories on t&f weren't selling the magazine. If you look at the issues from the '50s, you'll also notice that SI isn't doing as many stories on hunting, recreational skiing, yachting, dog shows, or chess.

[MJD]

Re: SI Covers

>>By
>SI's count, track is the number 8
>most-"covered" sport, behind pro and college
>football and basketball, baseball, golf, and
>boxing, but ahead of hockey and tennis.

Pony express finally delivered my copy. Been getting it since about 1970 and have them all in various piles. After collecting 250 or so of them, I actually sorted them by sport to do the same analysis. Track is also 6th not 8th. I'd like to think that college and pro football and college and pro basketball are kinda like the same sports. T&F would be much lower if they split track and field.

[Guest]

Re: SI Covers

After collecting 250
>or so of them, I actually sorted them by sport to
>do the same analysis. Track is also 6th not 8th.
>I'd like to think that college and pro football
>and college and pro basketball are kinda like the
>same sports. T&F would be much lower if they
>split track and field.

You did a yeoman's job in counting all the covers, and I hope it was fun, but SI already had done the counting -- see page 94, where SI says track and field had 99 covers and was #8. Perhaps you counted other covers (Olympics with track featured?). Anyway, SI was my source -- figured they knew.

[MJD]

Re: SI Covers

>You did a yeoman's job in counting all
>the covers, and I hope it was fun, but SI already
>had done the counting -- see page 94, where SI
>says track and field had 99 covers and was #8.
>Perhaps you counted other covers (Olympics with
>track featured?). Anyway, SI was my source --
>figured they knew.

No all I'm saying is that I went through the same exercise whn I was a kid. My point is that I don't think that pro and college basketball should be 2 different sports. Dittoes for pro and college football. That's all. If you consider them the same(which kind of strikes me as a non debatable point)-track was 6th not 8th. Why not pull out college track covers out then? It's a ridiculous distinction.

[MJD]

Re: SI Covers

...and I'm not picking on you SI reader. I realize that is what the magazine says and you were just quoting. Your post happened to be the only one that mentioned the ranking.

[Guest]

Re: SI Covers

No offense was taken, I was just curious whether you counted the covers to confirm SI, or just missed their count. And no offense meant --

[Guest]

Re: SI Covers

I think Jim Ryun (7) leads track athletes in number of SI covers? Seems fitting as he was the biggest name of his generation. Carl Lewis might have done better, if he had been more promotable.

[Guest]

Re: SI Covers

Interesting to note that in the SI cover issue the state of Kansas is spotlighted and it mentions the Kansas Relays as one of the important "numbers" in state history.

1923 Year when the renowned Kansas Relays track and field meet began.

I wonder when the last time the Kansas Relays got press in SI? Ryun's last cover? The Russian visit in 1983?

[Guest]

Re: SI Covers

Ryun got 7, Lewis got 6, Slaney got 4, Elle MacPherson got 4 (oh, sorry); they're the most, unless you count track star O.J. Simpson, who got 9!

[MJD]

Re: SI Covers

This should probably go into the ever expanding trivia section but SI says that Billy won 6 marathons in a row and then in 78 fell victim to the SI cover curse by losing the 7th after he was on the cover. He won Boston and New York that year and then he was on the cover after the NY win. He won Boston in 79 so he must have gone to Fukuoka(sp?) shortly after his NY win unless he ran something else before Boston/79.

[dl]

Re: SI Covers

Boston Billy did indeed run Fukuoka in '78, finishing 6th, just 7 seconds behind the Soviet Leonid Moseyev, who ended up getting the No. 1. ranking (also having won the Euro Champs title) even though Rodgers won both NYC and Boston.

[dl]

Re: SI Covers

My favorite SI track covers are of Pre as a frosh (of course) and Coghlan from one of his indoor mile WRs.

[6 5.5hjsteve]

Re: SI Covers

well, MY 2 co-favorites are the 1956 Dave Sime/Bobby Morrow cover and the 1962(?) Valeriy Brumel cover. (He had 2; this was the first which was a photo. A year later there was a drawing one of him.)

[MJD]

Re: SI Covers

>Boston Billy did indeed run Fukuoka in '78,
>finishing 6th, just 7 seconds behind the Soviet
>Leonid Moseyev, who ended up getting the No. 1.
>ranking (also having won the Euro Champs title)
>even though Rodgers won both NYC and Boston.

I assume Billy was second in the voting. What did he have-about 5 weeks rest between the 2 races and he only lost by 7 seconds to the Russian? Kind of late to bitch and I wasn't a subscriber then but I think I would have gone with Billy. Who is still around that would have been in on that choice that I can see about that:-)? I am assuming that neither one did anything else that year in the marathon. They were likely both on the track and Billy must have run the world x-c but I realize that none of that counts.