APRIL 02 — The domestic sport’s eye-blink of a shoulder season is upon us as I write. The NCAA Indoor and two of the blockbuster high school nationals went off three weeks ago, the World Indoor is two weeks in the rearview mirror. Outdoor collegiate competition commenced in earnest last weekend — with two CRs reported in this issue.
The first event of that newcomer series, Grand Slam Track, is about to start in Kingston. The outdoor season will soon be racing like a comet. Already is. Expect explosions on the track and field. Athletes and coaches are laboring hard to produce them.
Yet I can’t escape the feeling that clear-eyed long-term vision is as lacking, and sorely needed, as perhaps it’s ever been. I am concerned and certain I’m not alone.
Coaches Sound Alarm: In mid-March a group of prominent college coaches emailed “An Open Letter to the Track & Field Community.” You’d recognize the names of the signees, heavy hitters of the profession.
Their letter is long, it pulls no punches. “We may not agree on every aspect of this document, however our inaction will be devastating for our sport.…
“The landscape of collegiate athletics is shifting rapidly, and the future of track & field is at risk. Recent NCAA changes—such as eliminating scholarship limits, implementing roster size caps, and introducing revenue sharing—will have a profound impact on our sport. This is a critical moment, and we can no longer afford to be passive. If programs are eliminated, they won’t return.”
The NCAA v. House Settlement, due for finalization in court in April, is the driver. The letter identifies the stakes for scholarships, roster sizes and exposure.
If “exposure” confuses you, the letter offers the following among its prescriptions for ways coaches can help as crisis looms:
“Track & field must become a more consumable product and more television-friendly. By introducing innovative formats, enhancing athlete storytelling, and pushing for prime-time broadcasts, we can increase the sport’s visibility and appeal to a wider audience.”
There’s much more in the letter — far more than there is room for in this column. I agree with deep concern, though, that the coaches are right in writing that consequences just around the curve “will harm the U.S. pipeline of athletes, diminishing our edge at the Olympic Games and World Championships. Our medal count at the Olympic Games is likely at risk.”
What I focus on as a dyed-in-the-wool fan is exposure. I think of it as presentation — and I can’t state the crux of the matter better than did a wiser head than mine in a social media post about the open letter.
“A coach’s job is to coach, so I don’t think many of them realize just how boring/unwatchable most college track meets are. How many meets (outside of conference/national champs, and maaaaaaaybe something like Penn/Drake) would you take a sports fan friend to, if they had to sit through the WHOLE thing?”
Spot-on question!
My thought is this. Coaches must, and quickly, consider blowing up the marks-based scheme for NCAA qualifying. College squads split up all spring to chase optimal conditions based on event. One even hears tales of coaches lobbying to get their athletes into slower sections at meets to merely chase Regional Q standards without having to run all out. Meets drone on and on all day and into the night. Who has the patience or iron backside to watch these bloated monstrosities? Where’s the rooting interest a newbie spectator might relate to?
As we processed results for our eTrack Newsletter last weekend, I came across a college meet with A) 194 starters in the men’s 100 and 200 alone. B) 208 in the men’s 1500 spread across 16 sections. C) 233 in the men’s 5000 in 10 races! Imagine the schedule with numbers like these across all events.
To be fair, that meet saw some spectacular results. Yet who apart from the teams, and a tiny retinue of hard-core local fans who’d done a deep dive on the start lists could have found a hook to put them in that stadium?
No current coach dreamed up this nightmare of unwatchability. They’re too busy working their butts off to support their athletes’ striving. They survive in the jungle they’ve inherited.
Coaches, however, might be the one group with adequate leverage and motivation to change it. We can’t look to general sports media or fans. They mostly checked out decades ago and the sport needs at least a few of them back.
