One of the big off track stories of the Olympics, was the athlete protest against IOC Rule #40 which prohibits athletes from promoting their sponsors during the Games. No tweets, headphones, headbands, in short nothing that in any way would “advertise” any sponsor that is not an “Official” Olympic sponsor.

Which left the athletes a bit bothered. After all they make their bread and butter from the people that sponsor them, and certainly wanted to show a bit of love during the biggest moment of their lives. So, for the first time I can think of since the 60’s when protests were common place and people like Steve Prefontaine voiced his issues with the then AAU, the athletes raised their voices in protest. More specifically they tweeted “#wedemandchange”. A movement that was led by the Track and Field Athletes Association – a group of high profile American athletes that includes Sanya Richards Ross, Bernard Lagat. Allyson Felix, and Tyson Gay among others.

“Wedemandchange” made the rounds on Twitter, and caused much talk about the unfairness of the Rule #40. However, the protest never went beyond the “tweeting” stage so there were no changes to Rule #40 and things went on as scheduled. The IOC advertised for the Official Sponsors of the Olympics, and everyone else had to wait. After all, the IOC and the rest of the alphabet club (IAAF, USOC, USATF, et al) are still in power – they control the money, and as such they still have the final word.

While money typically represents the root of most power in sports, there is power in numbers. What was important in London is that the athletes showed a semblance of solidarity on an issue of importance to them and in the process began to realize that they may have power in numbers.

That potential power got a boost this week when it was announced that several non American athletes have joined the cause led by Usain Bolt, Yohan Blake and David Rudisha – great names to have in your corner. While its great to have a large number of athletes banding together however, the real question is: how far are they willing to go to achieve the change that they desire? Or rephrased to what degree are they willing to exercise their power?

Having grown up during the 60’s I’ve seen first hand the power of numbers vs the power of the dollar. When trying to effect change from those that control the cash flow, a group must find a way to have an effect on that flow. During the Civil Rights Movement this was done primarily via Boycotts – not buying things which reduced the revenue generation of those in power. Hurting one in the “pocket book” can be the ultimate pain.

In the case of track and field, that would translate to boycotting meets. With respect to Rule #40 that would mean boycotting the Olympic Games – but that is some four years away now. If that is the only issue that these athletes have a problem with, then I guess there is plenty of time to organize a boycott of the Rio Games – if that is indeed the goal.

But in “watching” the Twitter protest of Rule#40, it seemed clear to me that money in general is a problem for the athletes. Rule #40 brought out the large volume of money that is made by the Olympics – and the fact that that money is not funneling it’s way down to the athletes. Not to be an instigator, but if the athletes take a look at the sport in general, there are a lot of people reaping the benefits of their performances. Everyone from meet promoters, to sponsors, to national federations. And with the exception of a handful of athletes like Usain Bolt, the majority of the athletes are working for what I would call slave wages.  A few athletes getting “professional” payments and the rest being tossed out scraps.

So perhaps instead of waiting around another four years to protest Rule #40, maybe the athletes can use this new found solidarity to tackle the real issue of the day – the way that money is distributed in this sport. Because ultimately resolution of that issue would tie itself into Rule #40 as well as a whole list of track and field matters.

That would require, not the services of an “Association”, but moving that Association towards a Union. It would also require potential “sacrifice”. A ready made example being the recent teachers’ strike in Chicago. Using the solidarity of their numbers, the teachers held out for what they believed were more fair employment conditions – in this case primarily in terms of benefits. Of course that meant not working for a period of time – a period of time in the beginning that was undefined. They risked their pay in order to gain more pay/benefits moving forward.

Are track and field’s athletes prepared to go to that extreme in their quest to make change in the sport? Missing the Olympics would not hurt them monetarily because they are not paid (at least US athletes aren’t unless they medal). But boycotting Zurich, Pre, Lausanne, or any of the other big name meets out there would mean missing a pay day. Are athletes like Bolt willing to miss that type of payday in the name of solidarity and change? Are the top ranked athletes willing to make that kind of sacrifice to move the sport forward? Because tweets aside, that is what it will take to make change in this sport.

I happen to agree with the athletes. Most are not compensated nearly to the degree that they should be, and there is too large of a disparity between the “Have’s” and the “Have Nots”. Granted some names should carry more weight. Athletes like Bolt, or Rudisha, or Felix, or Chernova, or Laviellenie are a draw and they should get paid like it. But they do not compete alone. And the others that compete against them have value as well – much more than they are generally paid.

Like the NBA, NFL, MLB and other sports, it is time that track and field took better care of ALL of its people. Collective bargaining could achieve that. As a matter of fact collective bargaining could finally put some structure to this sport. The question is: are the athletes ready for this fight? Are they willing to make sacrifice? Is this the group of pioneers the sport has been waiting for to take the next step in professionalism?

We will have to watch to find out, but this could be the most important story of 2013. Personally, I hope this is the group of pioneers the sport has been waiting for. This sport made its way from amateurism to the professionalism we know today way back in the early 80’s. Since then it has stagnated in what I call a half way place between amateurism and professionalism. Yes there is cash flow, but just enough to “keep em happy”. #Wedemandchange showed the kind of fire that the athletes of the 80’s had – Carl Lewis, Edwin Moses, Butch Reynolds, Evelyn Ashford et al. Athletes that at the end of the day were willing to fight for what they believed in.

Back in the day when we would watch the 4×4, the common phrase that we would use when everyone would come off the final bend and head down the straight was “ah we’re going to find out if his heart is pumping blood or Kool Aid”. I think we’ll see in 2013 if the athletes in this movement are pumping blood or Kool Aid. I hope it’s blood. I hope they’re serious. The sport has been stagnant for too long and it is time for change.