There is much conversation these days about the impending death of track and field, and with good reason. After all here in the US, we’ve seen a once thriving sport wither down to a handful of elite meets – with embarrassingly poor attendance, and poor television coverage. A far cry from the golden era of the sport from the 60’s thru the 80’s.

That said, I’m not sure that the "panic" approach called for by some is the way to make things better. By panic approach, I refer to those that call for such drastic measures as ripping meets apart into mini meets of distance only, sprint only, throws only etc. Or cutting meets in half or a third – ostensibly to make them more "television friendly". Or having a rock concert and running a track meet in the background.

To me, this is a defeatist attitude that basically says the sport is not good enough to attract the public and therefore must be radically changed – and I believe that those that support this philosophy couldn’t be further away from the truth.

Why? Because this is the same sport that saw full stadiums right here in the US for meets in Modesto & Fresno; Los Angeles & San Diego. It’s the same sport that once filled up Drake, Austin, Gainesville, and Knoxville – and not that long ago. The same sport that prompted the building of the Home Depot Center in Southern California and the creation of the Goodwill Games right here in the US.

More importantly it’s the sport that is still thriving in Eugene and Philadelphia – WITHOUT cutting the meets into tiny pieces, or in half, or otherwise bastardizing them. Oh yeah, they’re both televised – just as they are! Imagine that. And "Penn" goes on for half a week. Of course Worlds and the Games last over a week, and so do the Trials – and they also have all of the events – and people can hardly wait for them to take place!

I write this on the heels of writing my review on Rome (another exciting meet), and waiting anxiously for the Prefontaine Classic to start tomorrow – with one of the finest start lists to be seen on the planet this year outside of the Trials and Games! “Pre” WILL no doubt be thoroughly exciting and equally well attended. Just as Doha was a captivating meet, and you and I both know that if there had been a full compliment of events, no one would have left or stopped watching on their screens!

So, what’s the problem – especially here in the US? Why only “Pre” and Penn, and perhaps New York, when not too far in the past that would have been a good weekends worth of action? The problem here in the states is that we weren’t ready for professionalism of the sport! We were stuck even more steadfastly than the Brits to the idea that track and field was, and in the minds of many is still, an amateur sport – and that’s how we ran our meets. We were used to having the world’s best athletes come run in locales like Eugene, Fresno, Modesto, Gainesville, San Diego, Des Moines, and others simply because they were meets with “traditions”. Don’t get me wrong, the athletes were always treated well – nice quarters to stay in; great food to eat. Athletes came to town and were treated like royalty – but they weren’t getting paid. Sponsorships were easy to obtain because meet promoters weren’t asking for a lot. Provide some rooms, meals, transportation – ah life was easy putting together an “amateur” meet.

Then in the ‘80’s the rules started changing. Athletes had been taking payments “under the table” for a long time, and in Europe we all knew that some countries were “subsidizing” their top athletes – “soldiers” in the Cold War. But suddenly the rules changed to allow “amateur” athletes in the sport to set up “accounts” that money could be placed in and ostensibly be overseen by the IAAF and governing bodies – you know to ensure that the funds were being used for the proper things like training, travel, supplies, etc. Of course that morphed into straight up payments for services – and it didn’t take long.

Without any real “structure” other than athletes could be paid for their “services”, professional track and field quickly moved to promoters bidding for the services of “star” athletes. Creating a sport of “Haves” and “Have Not’s” as the “star attractions” like Carl Lewis, Edwin Moses, FloJo, to Michael Johnson, Mo Greene, and Marion Jones, et al began to attract five digit appearance fees, while others had to settle for what promoters had left in their budgets.

In the case of European meets, promoters had long ago begun to lock up strong sponsorship ties – as they had been funneling money “under the table” for a very long time. Professionalism simply meant getting sponsors to “augment the pot” – knowing that meets were still able to secure top talent and in turn fill up stadiums, and attract television revenue. As the Asian market began to get on board, they did so knowing the ground rules for getting in the game – you needed sponsors and large sums of money. Here in the US, we thought that we could continue to play the new game by the old rules – figuring that “loyalty” would keep top athletes returning to their “traditional” meets at “home”. Unfortunately we found out that loyalty oft times has a price in the world of professional sports, as athletes began to migrate in large numbers away from US meets, to compete in the more lucrative European Circuit and budding Asian meets.

The result of course being that as domestic meets found themselves without top level talent, meets began to die as promoters struggled to “get with the program” and attract sponsors for their meets. A difficult assignment as instead of relying on “local” businesses to provide luxuries for athletes, the goal shifted to larger “corporate” sponsorships – which meant trying to attract money from corporations that had absolutely no previous ties to our product. Not an easy task – especially when you are late to the party. The result was failure to acquire the funds necessary to secure top athletes and therefore continue to run meets in the manner that fans had become accustomed to – and the resultant death of the large majority of high level meets in the United States.

So there you have it, my assessment of what’s happened to track and field in this country. The bottom line with track and field, as it is with ANY sport, is that people pay to see the best possible talent that your sport has to offer. When that talent isn’t provided, fans simply don’t turn out as fans “vote” with their feet and wallets.

Sure, you can try “gimmicks”, but gimmicks really don’t work without star talent to put in front of it. The NBA Slam Dunk competition was the Center of All Star Weekend as long as Michael Jordan, Dominique Wilkins, Spud Webb and the “stars” competed – decades of can’t miss TV. Today no one cares about a Slam Dunk competition without Carmelo Anthony, Kobe Bryant or Lebron James – so it’s now dead on the vine without star quality to fuel it. In track and field look no further than the Manchester Street Games. Just how much attention did the Street Games get this year without a Usain Bolt or Tyson Gay to headline it? Most might not have realized the meet took place at all if not for the lack of a row of hurdles in the women’s 100 hurdles – the biggest headline coming out of the meet!

Quite frankly I could put a meet on on MY street and get world wide attention if I could get Bolt v Gay in the 100; Blake v Dix in the deuce; Uceny v Dibaba in the 1500; and a pair of hurdle races featuring Pearson v any group of Americans; and Liu, Oliver, Robles, and Merritt. Oh, and let’s throw in a 4×1 around the block featuring both sets of American and Jamaican squads and any fillers! If I could put THAT meet on on my street we could sell seats on the roofs of every house on the block, because it’s not the gimmicks it’s the athletes you get to compete! The key to a track meet in 2012, is the same as in 1992, 1972, or 1942 – the athletes are and always have been the show. Which means the key to ANY meet today is securing enough money to pay the athletes that draw the fans you want to fill your venue!

The reason people want to cut meets in half is NOT because half a meet is better, but because it’s harder to fund a full meet. Television is worried about ratings, which translates to how good the competition is! They worry about televising a “long” meet because without the stars and stories two hours IS too long for TV. Of course there will be an unprecedented amount of Olympic coverage (hours at a time), with track and field as one of the center pieces – because it’s a meet of STARS!

So the bottom line is that the problem with track and field really comes down to SPONSORSHIP and fundraising – getting enough money to pay the athletes and therefore put on quality competitions! THAT is where the new CEO of USATF MUST start! Secure the money and you secure the athletes. Secure the athletes and you will get full stadiums for your meets – and then no one is talking about radically changing the sport!

Next I want to talk about the second half of the equation – how to run better meets. Securing the best talent is obviously the most crucial part of fixing track in the country, because the athletes ARE the product. After the product is secured, we need to do a better job of marketing and presentation of our meets, because you have to get them to the stadium, AND afterwards you want them to come back. I’ll give my two cents on that part of the issue next week.