Anyone else get a kick out of Wieczorek getting the team trophy wearing a big Brooks headband?

Bender of rules wrote:

It does appear to be a violation of WIAA rules. When I was in the same situation I was willing to be fined or fired, because I was going to be there with my kids regardless of those rules. It didn't happen. I hope nothing happens to him.

As the rules have been explained to me in the past

You cannot:

1. Organize/Coach a practice during the off-season (the day after state until the day after the final Spring Sports tournament has concluded)

2. (Athletes cannot) Use school-issued uniforms or equipment

3. Provide transportation to/from an out of season event

4. Provide sports-specific instruction, teach any phase of a game/activity, or have athletes engage in sports-specific drills

So, in the case of coaches of teams or athletes that qualify for BorderClash or NXN Nationals or attend NXN Regionals, the coaches cannot provide transportation, the athletes cannot use school-issued uniforms, and the coach cannot hold a practice or conduct sports-specific drills. Athletes can do all that (organize practice, use a stopwatch, etc.) on their own, though, and coaches are not barred from being at the same location as their athletes as long as they are not actively coaching.

I guess I don't know the interpretation for suggesting race strategy to an athlete if asked. But other than that, WA coaches being at NXN isn't violating any rules, because they didn't provide transportation (Nike did, and their parents probably drove them to the airport if they fly in), they aren't organizing/holding a practice, and aren't timing their athletes in some kind of drill (workout).

That was really great of them, since there wasn't already a national championship!

There wasn't. Did you ever see FL? There was no team championship. XC is a team sport at every level from modified to HS to NCAA to open to pro's at worlds.

It's a team sport and FL had the chance to include teams, the refused, so Nike went out on their own.

Good move Nike, bad move FL.

Not willing to be cheap wrote:

As a High School Coach that has been to the meet twice as a team, we stopped attending because my top athletes hated it. Of the 14 student athletes that I have taken to the meet only my back kids were impressed and that is simply because they don't have other options. Nike has used their muscle to diminish the importance of the Footlocker Meet and it is pretty sad.

I've had coaches who have been there every time they've had it that it's a great experience and their kids love it.

My kids love the regional race, we go every year.

I've been to both on a regional level and when Nike pulled out FL died.

I even told the FL guy in my region to include teams and he said they just didn't have to. He was wrong.

runn wrote:

XC is a team sport at every level from modified to HS to NCAA to open to pro's at worlds.

uhm... no...

800 dude wrote:

Are you kidding me? Wieczorek is sponsored by Brooks. Better believe he's going to wear their gear during one of the few moments in a year when gets any real exposure.

If Brooks wanted more exposure, maybe they should have seen a need for a meet like this and stepped up and created it.

Nike's event, Nike wants exposure. I don't think that's unfair. If Brooks wants exposure, they should do more for the sport. They have Hanson's, and they sell shoes on the cheap to some select college teams. Not knocking them, just putting it in perspective.

What company does more to promote the sport than Nike?

themanontherun wrote:

800 dude wrote:

Are you kidding me? Wieczorek is sponsored by Brooks. Better believe he's going to wear their gear during one of the few moments in a year when gets any real exposure.

If Brooks wanted more exposure, maybe they should have seen a need for a meet like this and stepped up and created it.

Nike's event, Nike wants exposure. I don't think that's unfair. If Brooks wants exposure, they should do more for the sport. They have Hanson's, and they sell shoes on the cheap to some select college teams. Not knocking them, just putting it in perspective.

What company does more to promote the sport than Nike?

I take it that you have not heard of the Brooks PR Invite? I see your point, but Brooks does quite a bit. Maybe not as much as Nike, but no one can afford to do as much as Nike. New Balance does a nice job also.

Promise you Nike isn't loosing money on the whole deal. Oh and btw...ask the kids how much they liked the soggy course? Last year was worse, but making a course "hard" just for the sake of making it hard (weather happens and kids get that ala NCAA's) doesn't help their cause.

Not you wrote:

Nike puts out a great deal of effort to create an incredible experience for the kids. I consider it a poor gesture.

thanks for reporting it - you must be a friend

[quote]wascallywobert wrote:

... but making a course "hard" just for the sake of making it hard (weather happens and kids get that ala NCAA's) doesn't help their cause.

[quote]

Are you implying that Nike floods their course to make it worse? Did they "freeze" it this year on purpose to make it "hard?" BTW, Nike has never flooded the course to make it muddy.

15 parents attending wrote:

I highly doubt the Nike execs actually watched the internet feed of NXN. And even if they did, who cares? That feed was watched by a miniscule fraction of shoe consumers.

You are really out of touch with how the shoe industry functions and influences running.

John Capriotti, Nike Global Director of Athletics, did not watch the internet feed because HE WAS IN ATTENDANCE. It's about more than an internet feed. It's the live moment and every picture of the awards stand. Like it or not, we are talking about business here, not fun and games.

If you think that the guerilla warfare and bad blood between brands is not taken seriously, you have absolutely no grasp on the reality of the business.

Say what you will about Nike and their motives, but Wieczorek showed his 'class' by thumbing his nose at the event's title and exclusive sponsor while involving the Gig Harbor athletes in the process.

I wonder if her made it a point to forego the free meals, lodging and on site transportation provided by Nike as well.

Actually, Wieczorek paid his own way and was not given anything by Nike. Not meals. Not lodging. Not transportation. Gig Harbor was accompanied by parents only.

And really, this is being made into a huge deal by people who need to get a life and stop sowing dissension on message boards. The kids (ALL of them) are thinking of this as a race, whether it's an exclusively sponsored one or not. To think that anyone planned to photo bomb Nike with Brooks is silly. Turn down your rhetoric. The posts here say more about the biases of the people posting than the kids and coaches involved.

Most of the Nike reps I've met are big fans of the story in which Michael Jordan (among others), at the Olympics where the Dream Team won gold, draped his American Flags over the Adidas(Reebok? some non-Nike company) logo on his uniform during the medal ceremony. Since they were the sponsor, they provided the uniforms, even though Jordan is a high profile Nike athlete.

This is a significantly smaller scale than that, and while covering one logo isn't the same as brandishing another, it's the same ball park. I promise you that NIKE doesn't care. Besides, Mark is a dude who wore a striped cotton t-shirt with NO logo before he got a sponsor.

Nike can institute a dress code requiring all attendees to wear swooshes if they want to. They have not done that, so some attendees wear Brooks, which should surprise no one.

You guys do realize what a sponsored athlete is right? Wizzo is sponsored by Brooks, so he is contractually obligated to wear Brooks at all athletic events, if not anywhere he is in the public view. Brooks wants exposure so they pay athletes to wear their brand. Everyone wants athletes to have more money and to get more sponsorships, yet he gets bashed for trying to fulfill his contract and actually make a return for them on their investment? It is already questionable enough whether sponsoring athletes in our sport, especially distance athletes, even makes a real financial difference for athletes of his caliber. Not only is he not allowed to wear Nike, he is not supposed to be wearing even neutral apparel at a running event. It would be silly to think that if Galen Rupp was coaching an athlete that qualified for the Brooks PR meet that he wouldn't be expected by Nike to be wearing their stuff. I don't even understand why this is controversial at or unexpected at all.

Aflac wrote:

Nike deserves slightly less credit for their generosity than Anheuser-Busch deserves for sponsoring the PGA tour, since Anheuser-Busch not only brings the athletes together to play, but also pays huge prizes and lets them drink Anchor Steam if they prefer Anchor Steam.

Yeah, not an equal analogy.

What if Mark just wore the Brooks stuff because he's paid to and wasn't trying to "stick it" to anyone? Not all motivation has to come from a malicious spot.

And to the someone who called out Brooks for "not doing anything for the sport like Nike." Well, Brooks pays Mark to race and train where his last shoe company and coach (i.e. Mark Rowland and Nike) decided to drop him.

And Brooks has the PR Meet, and they have that new Brooks team that was on Flotrack a few weeks back. For a company that's super small that very good.

Nike is a Corporation not a person. Any efforts Nike took were to make money, not out of the goodness of its heart. I'm not criticizing Nike they are acting as they should but don't pretend like the kids or anyone else owes them anything for some magnanimous action.

Yeah, I am not sure about the crappy running gear comment. It seems that they have brought some stuff to the market in recent years, which everyone else is now copying. First Nike Free now everyone does Barefoot ie Brooks Pure Project, Asics 33 etc. First Lunar responsive Foam, now Adi Boost. First Dynamic Support gradual Pronation support, now Asics Duomax and I believe the new Adrenaline 14 which I saw in Austin last week comes with a very similar technology. The list goes one with Nike Flyknit which somewhere else became Adi Primeknit. You get the point. ... Not sticking up for them but they have kind of lead the way in terms of moving the Running Footwear industry into the next era. Colored midsoles, lighter Uppers and simply more innovative products have all transformed the way we run today. ... Credit where credit is due.

flaglite wrote:

Didn't see it, but anyone giving a middle finger to N*ke is good with me. Make crappy running shoes and are a bully in the industry.

Not willing to be cheap wrote:

As a High School Coach that has been to the meet twice as a team, we stopped attending because my top athletes hated it. Of the 14 student athletes that I have taken to the meet only my back kids were impressed and that is simply because they don't have other options. Nike has used their muscle to diminish the importance of the Footlocker Meet and it is pretty sad.

I call BS. There isn't a high school team in the country who is consistently ranked top 5 that isn't at least trying to make it to Nationals.

You may have stopped running the regional but what you wrote above isn't true.