comments pulled from two different threads in the wake of Reebok:
knite: <<Hence the reason why I always wonder why meets are in Eugene or Sacramento only....I know they are GREAT towns, knowledgeable, etc, but it doesn't do the sport any bit of good to only hold the trials/nationals in mainly one or 2 places in the states.>>
Al in NYC: << holding almost all national events in small cities in one small area of the country seems awful short-sighted in terms of the national future of elite-level track & field.>>
What would be gained by taking the meet to many more places? (keeping in mind that so doing is going to mean a major hit to USATF's thin coffers)
knite: <<Hence the reason why I always wonder why meets are in Eugene or Sacramento only....I know they are GREAT towns, knowledgeable, etc, but it doesn't do the sport any bit of good to only hold the trials/nationals in mainly one or 2 places in the states.>>
Al in NYC: << holding almost all national events in small cities in one small area of the country seems awful short-sighted in terms of the national future of elite-level track & field.>>
What would be gained by taking the meet to many more places? (keeping in mind that so doing is going to mean a major hit to USATF's thin coffers)
Comment