NYRR are crybabies

what the fvck are you talking about? theres a backstory on my anonymous comment? no. i was responding to you.

I find this quite entertaining. Having had less than positive dealings with USATF, Houston and Mary W, we're enjoying the public display of dysfunction. These people all deserve each other.

Then I apologize.

Yanqui wrote:

Well, if NYC was willing to go up to $1 million for one Trials and Houston was bidding $1.7 million for both, it's pretty obvious Houston's bid was contingent on its hosting BOTH Trials...that it wasn't interested in just one, that it was a take it or leave it kind of thing.

I don't dispute the notion that NYC is full of itself. But the fact is the NYRR did everything it should have to host ONE Trial, which is all it wanted. But Houston forced Logan's hand. A lot of Wittenberg's ire is based on the fact that Logan kept the NYRR in the dark until almost the moment he made the announcement (when he had already been in Houston for awhile). He didn't handle this very smoothly.

It comes down to what Logan thinks rights to the women's trials are worth. Apparently not $700,000.

Don't take a guy with two Bronze Stars from Nam lightly.

lagsun wrote:

As for TV coverage or lack thereof, blame NBC, the USOC and USATF, not the organizers.

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

Mary promised live TV coverage for the last trials and then could not provide. It doesn't matter who is at fault. Only one person promised the TV coverage as part of her bid. That was Mary.

I wanted to know what the financial penalty to the NYRR for not delivering on their promiswe was? I will tell you what it should be. Permanent Ban from all USATF events.

Yeah, I suppose the Super Bowl would be better if it were held in NYC every time, too? The sport is actually healthier when its biggest events are not cloistered in the same venues every time.

they all need to grow up! wrote:

I find this quite entertaining. Having had less than positive dealings with USATF, Houston and Mary W, we're enjoying the public display of dysfunction. These people all deserve each other.

+1

Looking for Godot wrote:

Why no criticism for Competitor Group which does nothing but profit from people that aren't remotely competitive?

Because they never put in a bid and nobody, given their obvious track record which you've pointed out, expects them to ever put in a bid. Believe me, they deserve plenty of criticism for profiting on the sport without really putting much back into it, their predatory tactics, and their craptastic publication that is even worse than RW. All of that just doesn't fit in here and pointing out how horrible they are doesn't mitigate NYRR's and Wittenberg's b.s. I'm sure this is nothing new for Mary, Mary, quite contrary, she's probably used to getting her way by the means she employs and throws others under the bus when she doesn't get her way.

I am proud to have started this thread. I am learning more about Mary and the NYRR than I anticipated.

Why did Mary ever agree to this interview? Why let the public see how you feel? That is poor business. It is okay to be upset. It is not okay for others to know.

I have been critical of the NYRR before, but Mary is exactly right on at least one count. I highly doubt that any of you have any idea what it takes to put on an OT. Putting up with the USOC's bullshit and the lack of support from USATF leads to bad feelings and a tremendous loss of money by all venues that have hosted the trials. Columbia was nice enough to come back and get bit again, NYRR offered to do the same. USATF has a history of biting the hand that feeds them. They've done it again. I can just abut guarantee that Houston will not be back in 2016, no mater how well people think they do in 2012. What USATF has done is burn yet another bridge. Pretty soon, there won't be any bridges left.

It's pretty much true that no one who has dealings with USATF ever emerges happy.

b-o-o h-o-o

ray wrote:

What USATF has done is burn yet another bridge. Pretty soon, there won't be any bridges left.

I agree with you. However there is one major difference. NYRR sends there entire staff to the convention every year and is politicing the entire time. I want to puke when the LDR committees praise Mr. Steinfeld for his great input, meanwhile he is sleeping at his seat.

You have been in these meetings so you know what I am talking about.

It is nice to see all of the backroom shenanigans NOT pay off. It is even more satisfying to see Mary crying about it.

The backroom shenanigans that include funding training groups across the country. God forbid a quid pro quo.

Looking for Godot wrote:

That in no way means that NYC should be awarded the next trials. NYRR lost $1,000,000 on the 2007 trials and was coming back again to bid. Why no criticism for Competitor Group which does nothing but profit from people that aren't remotely competitive?

This is the quote of the Thread. I don't know if the NYRR deserved the Trials are not. I am glad that others are at least others are tryign to get them.

But the NYRR does more to support distance running on this planet than just about anyone. I've always been a bit fearful of Competitor as their #1 goal is to make a buck. Thus they can pay one or two big names to come in and look like a legit race when really most of the money is going to them.

The NYRR is a non-profit.

now now now wrote:

The backroom shenanigans that include funding training groups across the country. God forbid a quid pro quo.

Actually that was done in a backroom that excluded many. Ask Estes or Latimer if Zap was included? Ask why the Hansons said "NO THANKS"?

That funding did not take place without huge strings attatched.

Hello people !

DD hit the nail right on the head here! everything else is backstory.

In an article months back the BAA talked about repeated requests to USATF, not for $, but just the blessing from USATF to pull in some revenue $ of their own to help cover the cost. USATF is only interested, well, in thier own interest - controlling the race 100%, reaping all the revenue and rewards and screw you if you don't like it.

Both BAA and NYRR did a top notch job and came away happy they did it. But both knew back in then what was to come. Their respective boards would not be willing to equal 2008's bid again for 2012 let alone raise it. So I don't think neither were too surprised they lost out. And quite honestly, I bet they we're glad to see it go elsewhere. BAA just put a better face on it.

I wonder what control USATF will wield over 'their' event. Will Chevron be able to hang out their banners and such for the trials of just the marathon. I think this was an issue with BAA. USATF wanted the womans trials run as a seperate event from Boston Marathon proper and BAA / John Hancock were not allowed to promote it in any way. Makes zero sense. Unless, of course, as the governing body you're not on the hook for any of the cost, will recieve pratically 100% of the benefit and could care less if you alienate host cities and sponsors - just as long as there is another sucker around the corner.

So congrats to Houston for being the top bid, or as DD points out, the one willing the lose the most. At least this time around.

If they were glad they didn't get the bid, why did NYRR up their bid when they were told their original bid wasn't going to cut it?