Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

USATF Names New Board Of Directors

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Barto
    Track and field will be a viable professional sport when we pay the losers to show up and play. Until then sorry, semi-pro at best. Without the subsidy that other countries' federations provide to the athletes the whole sport collapses. Period - end of story.

    If you think there is a market for track meets with only sprints and hurdles, then go promote that type of event. You would soon find that Europeans would not buy it and neither will enough Americans to make it fly.
    I have an impression you equate "professional" with "viable".
    Do you, or I misunderstand what you are saying?
    "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
    by Thomas Henry Huxley

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Barto
      Track and field will be a viable professional sport when we pay the losers to show up and play. Until then sorry, semi-pro at best. Without the subsidy that other countries' federations provide to the athletes the whole sport collapses. Period - end of story.........
      And without the salaries that baseball players get from their teams that sport would collapse; what's the difference who's paying?

      Comment


      • #33
        Speaking of professional, no one has said a word about the pro t&f league being attempted in the UK - see the link on the front page. Is that a model that might work?

        Comment


        • #34
          Not remotely, if for no other reason than because the UK is a nice compact little country.... just think of the logistics of such an undertaking from sea to shining sea. (We won't even get into the fact that the average Brit actually likes the sport.)

          Comment


          • #35
            I haven't been able to fully follow the discussion on the new USATF board/Project 30 recommendations, etc., but I would like to make a few comments.

            1. I agree 100% that the USOC (and perhaps now USATF) is mistaken in making the Olympics the be-all and end-all of our sport. Everyone wants Team USA to do well at the Games, but I would take half the medal haul in exchange for more meets on TV, a more robust domestic circuit, more support for emerging athletes, etc.

            2. The idea that our Olympians need to compete less between the Trials and Games is a bit naive. I haven't had the time to look at the list of competitions by Olympians between the Trials and Games included in the Project 30 report, but everyone should keep in mind that EVERY ATHLETE AND EVERY AGENT know that the number one way to make a lot of money in our sport is by doing well in the Olympic Games. No one would sacrifice that for a little bit more money on the circuit. For most events, other than perhaps the 10,000 and decathlon, not competing between the Trials and the Games is NOT a good way to stay sharp and be at the top of one's game for the Games. As I mentioned on a previous post, I thought it was only the corrupt and incompetent Kenyan federation that blamed poor performance at championships on greedy agents and athletes competing too much.

            3. Perhaps I missed something, but is there a meet/race promoter or an agent on the Board?

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by gh
              Analysis from a longtime USATF follower (who obviously had very strong feelings going into the whole process):

              <<I am not very positive about the new Board. The 15th member will come from those six 5E member organizations (NAIA, NCAA, etc.). Probably a coach. I hear the NCAA is not happy about the possibility
              of not having a Board seat......>>
              Wonder how the coaches/NCAA will feel about the 5E seat apparently going to roadie Jeff Darman?

              So the board has nobody on it who has served in what is actually the engine that drives the sport--the NCAA feeder system--in 20-odd years?

              Comment


              • #37
                Garry H / others - perhaps this is my naiveté and/or not really connected to things track/field, but Do you have no pull amongst that group? And do they not regard TFN as a finger on the pulse? Or ...??? Things are sounding pretty grim

                Comment


                • #38
                  At the risk of self-aggrandizement/elitism, we have the ear of a few selected people who know how to look at the big picture. Unfortunately, as in real life, it's the special-interest people who tend to rule.

                  We count minor victories here and there, but in general, we're not major players when it comes to effecting change at the alphabet-soup level. But we keep on keepin' on, as they say.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Jeff Darman of RRCA was named announced yesterday as the person from the organizational members. That completes the 15-member board. They also announced its first meeting will be in Orlando on March 8th - when they will probably name Stephanie Hightower as the Chair.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X