Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Interesting AP story on the demise of track and field

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

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

  • #31
    Originally posted by nokick
    Pay-per-view
    There really aren't enough of us to make it worthwhile. Go to letsrun and you can see that a large portion of the most ardent fans are starving college kids. This message board would be the market pool they'd have to target and there just aren't that many of us here, no matter how much we want it to happen. That's why I'm praying for NBC's new Oly Sports cable channel to make it, so we get agglomerate the other niche sports under one aegis and go forth into the battle.

    Comment


    • #32
      Interesting AP Story on the Demise of Track and Field

      Originally posted by Marlow
      Originally posted by nokick
      Pay-per-view
      There really aren't enough of us to make it worthwhile. Go to letsrun and you can see that a large portion of the most ardent fans are starving college kids. This message board would be the market pool they'd have to target and there just aren't that many of us here, no matter how much we want it to happen. That's why I'm praying for NBC's new Oly Sports cable channel to make it, so we get agglomerate the other niche sports under one aegis and go forth into the battle.
      Do you remember the 1992 "Triplecast?" It was a financial disaster. As the OG went on, NBC couldn't cut the price fast enough, but it failed to approach the minimum number of viewers. My wife & I signed up on the 1st day, but very few viewers joined us.

      I enjoyed the T&F of course. My wife loves all Olympic sports, so we took our vacation then. We took TAFNOT in 1984 & 1996 & were very satisified. We were able to watch some baseball in addition to ALL T&F.

      A friend explained the weakness of pay - per -view. He is a target shooter. I was surprised to learn that NONE OF THE SHOOTING COMPETITION WAS ON THE TRIPLECAST!! IF T&F is a "niche" sport, OG has many smaller niches, that can only be addressed with many more than 3 channels & I doubt that such a situation would be profitable because the niches are too small.
      none

      Comment


      • #33
        Remember when Pre told Bowerman he didn't want to run the 5K because no one cared about the 5K--Bowerman told Pre, "Give them something to care about by running the 5K."

        In every sense, in every way possible--we all have to promote the sport.

        Go to meets.

        Watch the meets.

        Write letters to the networks.

        Nike can't do it all in supporting track.

        Comment


        • #34
          Re: Interesting AP Story on the Demise of Track and Field

          I subscribed to the triplecast too. I can't remember which channel was my favorite - the red, white or blue.

          NBC sounds like they're pretty much doing the triplecast online this year, except you can't get track live. They'll have a special Olympic basketball and soccer channel, but nothing for track. Your friend should be happy as shooting is one of the 25 sports that will get streamed online.

          This USA Today page provides a more detailed look at NBC's coverage than any page I've seen thus far. As best as I can tell, the marathons will be live in the U.S (and that will be the only live track and field event). I suspect everything else will be on about an 8-12 hour delay.

          http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics ... dule_N.htm

          Originally posted by Gleason
          Originally posted by Marlow
          Originally posted by nokick
          Pay-per-view
          There really aren't enough of us to make it worthwhile. Go to letsrun and you can see that a large portion of the most ardent fans are starving college kids. This message board would be the market pool they'd have to target and there just aren't that many of us here, no matter how much we want it to happen. That's why I'm praying for NBC's new Oly Sports cable channel to make it, so we get agglomerate the other niche sports under one aegis and go forth into the battle.
          Do you remember the 1992 "Triplecast?" It was a financial disaster. As the OG went on, NBC couldn't cut the price fast enough, but it failed to approach the minimum number of viewers. My wife & I signed up on the 1st day, but very few viewers joined us.

          I enjoyed the T&F of course. My wife loves all Olympic sports, so we took our vacation then. We took TAFNOT in 1984 & 1996 & were very satisified. We were able to watch some baseball in addition to ALL T&F.

          A friend explained the weakness of pay - per -view. He is a target shooter. I was surprised to learn that NONE OF THE SHOOTING COMPETITION WAS ON THE TRIPLECAST!! IF T&F is a "niche" sport, OG has many smaller niches, that can only be addressed with many more than 3 channels & I doubt that such a situation would be profitable because the niches are too small.

          Comment


          • #35
            Re: Interesting AP Story on the Demise of Track and Field

            Originally posted by marndar
            I subscribed to the triplecast too. I can't remember which channel was my favorite - the red, white or blue.

            NBC sounds like they're pretty much doing the triplecast online this year, except you can't get track live. They'll have a special Olympic basketball and soccer channel, but nothing for track. Your friend should be happy as shooting is one of the 25 sports that will get streamed online.

            This USA Today page provides a more detailed look at NBC's coverage than any page I've seen thus far. As best as I can tell, the marathons will be live in the U.S (and that will be the only live track and field event). I suspect everything else will be on about an 8-12 hour delay.

            http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics ... dule_N.htm

            Originally posted by Gleason
            Originally posted by Marlow
            Originally posted by nokick
            Pay-per-view
            There really aren't enough of us to make it worthwhile. Go to letsrun and you can see that a large portion of the most ardent fans are starving college kids. This message board would be the market pool they'd have to target and there just aren't that many of us here, no matter how much we want it to happen. That's why I'm praying for NBC's new Oly Sports cable channel to make it, so we get agglomerate the other niche sports under one aegis and go forth into the battle.
            Do you remember the 1992 "Triplecast?" It was a financial disaster. As the OG went on, NBC couldn't cut the price fast enough, but it failed to approach the minimum number of viewers. My wife & I signed up on the 1st day, but very few viewers joined us.

            I enjoyed the T&F of course. My wife loves all Olympic sports, so we took our vacation then. We took TAFNOT in 1984 & 1996 & were very satisified. We were able to watch some baseball in addition to ALL T&F.

            A friend explained the weakness of pay - per -view. He is a target shooter. I was surprised to learn that NONE OF THE SHOOTING COMPETITION WAS ON THE TRIPLECAST!! IF T&F is a "niche" sport, OG has many smaller niches, that can only be addressed with many more than 3 channels & I doubt that such a situation would be profitable because the niches are too small.
            Excellent point. Although pay-per-view on TV won't work, online is a great idea. It would be better if T&F were live.

            In 2000 I developed a schedule where all distance races were between 6 & 10 am Sydney time to show live to Europe & Africa and all field event finals plus sprints & hurdles were between 10am & 2pm to show live to Americas.

            The problem with this is the only events after 2pm would be field event prelims--no running events. Swimming has no version of field events--the closest is diving which is held in separate pools in OG, so I didn't press the issue.
            none

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by tandfman
              Originally posted by cornstarchwilson
              white males control almost everything in the world and except for rabid fans, most white people are not interested in anything that contradict the ideology of white supremacy.

              track and field still move the white fans who care about performance and not skin color but they are in a distinct minority. the casual white fan is only interested in track and field if some white person is doing something incredible. they are not interested in the performance of nonwhites
              Nonsense! (And racist nonsense, at that.)
              I agree wholeheartedly.

              I don't care what color they are. I enjoy the competition. I remember back when they had the World Cup in 1979 and showed the entire high jump competition. That was so good. Now all we get is Dwights 20 second recap. You cannot develop interest without allowing the drama to capture the interest of fans on its own.

              Comment


              • #37
                The biggest issue I have with T&F coverage is that I am constantly talked down to. I just finished watching excellent coverage of the Tour de France in which the commentators talked about complex team tactics, only used metric units to describe distances and speeds, and never told me how many laps around my high school track the race related to. Track (and field) is the simplest of all sports. Isn't it enough for the viewer to realize that the fastest runner, highest/longest jumper, farthest thrower wins? If coverage of American football, auto racing, golf, etc can spend hours discussing minutia of strategy, tactics, and preparation who is it that assumes people watching an 800M race can't understand what they are watching?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by mj
                  who is it that assumes people watching an 800M race can't understand what they are watching?
                  Indeed, who?

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by marndar
                    The point was Costas was in Omaha for swimming but not in Eugene for track.
                    We should count our blessings. The NBC team that did the trials was simply outstanding. The only other sports announcer that beats that team is Brian Lamply (is it HBO) the boxing announcer. He has no equal in any sport.

                    As for why track is not as popular I have pontificated on this in the past and there is plenty to consider but I have to think that a very big part of it is that we are now a very diverse and fragmented culture, we do not have a few national sports as we did in the 50s. There are so many sport that attract attention from sizable groups.


                    Is some part of the popularity of MBL/NBA/NFL sporting events the simple fact that the tickets are tax deductable to a business. I think if you factor out the commercially purchased seats we might find that the interest is far less than it was in 20 years ago. Do people really watch the NBA championships? These sports have done a very good job of marketing. Some of the commercials that ESPN has really draw you to like the players. that one with the celtic players in the office, pure genius.
                    ... nothing really ever changes my friend, new lines for old, new lines for old.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Interesting AP Story on the Demise of Track and Field

                      Originally posted by paulthefan
                      Originally posted by marndar
                      The point was Costas was in Omaha for swimming but not in Eugene for track.
                      We should count our blessings. The NBC team that did the trials was simply outstanding. The only other sports announcer that beats that team is Brian Lamply (is it HBO) the boxing announcer. He has no equal in any sport.

                      As for why track is not as popular I have pontificated on this in the past and there is plenty to consider but I have to think that a very big part of it is that we are now a very diverse and fragmented culture, we do not have a few national sports as we did in the 50s. There are so many sport that attract attention from sizable groups.


                      Is some part of the popularity of MBL/NBA/NFL sporting events the simple fact that the tickets are tax deductable to a business. I think if you factor out the commercially purchased seats we might find that the interest is far less than it was in 20 years ago. Do people really watch the NBA championships? These sports have done a very good job of marketing. Some of the commercials that ESPN has really draw you to like the players. that one with the celtic players in the office, pure genius.
                      Where is the proof that "track is not as popular?" Attendance & participation are at record levels. TV ratings are higher than the NBA.

                      I realize that the AP is a dying institution which has to make up stories to find attention, but posters here are too smart to believe those nitwits. I caught a mistake by a S.F. Chronicle reporter about 2 weeks ago.

                      The decline of T&F is an urban myth. "Where's the beef?"
                      none

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Interesting AP Story on the Demise of Track & Field

                        Originally posted by nokick
                        After looking back on the Olympic Trials--it appears track can be big in America.

                        First, at the NCAA level I see the big issue is the disappearance of the dual meet. Anyone remember 50,000 people at the UCLA-USC dual? When the scholarship limit on the mens side made it impossible to field a dual meet team--we have this choatic schedule going on. Most schools don't even have a home meet.

                        Second, we need some big gala meets. I would also encourage national dual meets--the big names would participate if we had huge amounts of prize money (let's say $50,000 for first place, $30,000 for second, and so forth).

                        Third, we need to demonstrate to the networks that track and field fans are out there waiting for meets to be televised, that have a sufficient marketability that awaits potential advertisers.
                        I don't "remember 50,000 people at the USC-UCLA dual" because it is an urban myth. I have every T&FN since 1954. I just spent 2 hours combing through every April & May issue.

                        In 1956, John Landy flew to the U.S. to promote the Melbourne OG. He ran a special mile vs. Ron Delaney, etc. as an EXTRA EVENT IN THE USC-UCLA dual meet in L.A. The crowd was 38,000+ & millions more watched on TV.

                        The next largest attendance was in 1971--official attendance of 17,400. I understand dual meet problems. Vern Wolfe was my coach at foothill JC in 1962. He coached USC from 1963 - 1984. When I moved to LA in 1967, I saw him at least every year. He ALWAYS complained about the scholarship level & I agree. That is a problem for PRIVATE UNIVERSITIES--the rest of the sport is doing well.

                        In the 1950s big California relay meets attracted up to 50,000 spectators. That is probably what "nokick" is recalling. In 1957, California had NO MLB teams--it now has 5 because of jet planes. In 1955, PennR attendance was 30,000-- it now exceeds 100,000.

                        There is no demise of T&F. More people live on the East Coast, so it is reasonable to expect attendance to shift there.
                        none

                        Comment

                        Working...
                        X