Where would be the best location in the US to put a track stadium that would actually draw fans?

Many years ago, there was a plan to build a track-only stadium in Bay Area to host the World Championship. I think the biggest obstacle to that plan was the financial cost.

Gary, Indiana, Gary, Indiana
Not Louisiana, Paris, France, New York or Rome
But Gary, Indiana, Gary, Indiana
Gary, Indiana, my home sweet home

Sacramento, like Cincinnati, is in a valley. Heavy air just hangs and gets trapped. It also isn’t that easy to get to. Sacramento airport is expensive as hell to fly in and out of. It’s a trek from SFO or Oakland. Although Reno is about the same distance, perhaps a bit farther, it is an easier drive. Reno, though, isn’t cheap.

San Diego has ideal weather. It usually doesn’t get oppressively hot and isn’t humid. There is the wind factor coming off of the Pacific but that is what tempers the weather. Flying into San Diego, although the construction at the airport sucks now, or LAX are options.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again - these boards, while popular, aren’t as popular as you think they are. There are a lot more fans that don’t visit this forum than do. That said, track & field as a whole is not that popular of a sport. Most people, unless they have a family member or a friend in the sport, or were involved in the sport themselves at some point, couldn’t care less about the sport. It just is what it is.

Upper Freehold, NJ

Easily accessible from 95, 195, 295. An easy hour from NY, less from Newark airport. Less than an hour from Philadelphia. 5 minutes from 6 Flags, so traffic is no issue. 30 minutes to the beaches.

Easy problem to solve - Eugene needs a major airport. Portland’s is on the north side of the city & Oregon needs another major airport. Take care of that & more hotels, restaurants etc will take care of itself. Truly a world class destination.

I don't think there is any city in the US that is any more or less inclined to turn out for a T&F event than any other. Boston, Chicago and NY get big crowds for their marathons. But those crowds just hang out for a bit on the sidewalk watching people go by. They do not buy tickets and know very little about the sport.

We are also long away from the days of the Santa Monica track club when all the best sprinters would move out to CA to train and race. No one part of the US is a hub for sprinters anymore.

We already tried T&F in the PNW and it isn't working.

I would say that if you had endless funds, build an indoor climate controlled T&F stadium in San Antonio, TX. It is a tourist city, but is still reasonably priced when it comes to hotels, food, etc. Texas is a sports crazy state and T&F is pretty huge in HS and college. So, there would be local demand. San Antonio is a 3 hour drive from Houston and 4 hour drive from DFW (hour from Austin). That puts about 16 million people within driving distance in addition to the @ 2 mil who live in the greater San Antonio area.

I know people have mentioned Boulder already, but what about the Denver metro area or Colorado Springs? I know people on here will complain about the altitude but it's still relatively cool and dry this time of year (70s-80s), and cools off a lot more at night (50s). The altitude would be great for a lot of events: sprints, jumps and throws. Once upon a time the 100m world record was set in Colorado Springs by Calvin Smith.

Denver is centrally located and has direct flights to virtually everywhere in the country, Colorado Springs has a descent little airport too. There is a healthy running and club track scene in Colorado, presumably there would be some local fans that would show up for a big meet.

No crime in Miami! LoL

I'm actually originally from Gary. Too bad all they've got is that song. And the Jackson family home.

I’d say something in the Los Angeles - San Diego corridor. Huge population center, good weather, easy to get to.

Meets in Portland not Eugene do reasonably well. Seattle would probably be alright too.

The biggest problem is domestic travel in the US is incredibly expensive and time consuming. If you hold the meet in Boston, DC, LA, etc. you need a big stadium on the outskirts of the metro so fans will actually want to go there if they don't already live along the subway/metro/whatever routes. Then because of North America's brutal summers, you are kind of limited to the northeast and west coast. XC nats in Terre Haute gets a big crowd so people will go wherever if it won't break the bank.

^This!! End of thread. Its time everyone realized this The average person doesn't want to sit all day watching people they don't know run around in circles.

Vegas, baby, Vegas.

Can a track fit in Allegiant stadium? Maybe even run a few events on the strip? A 60m dash through the Bellagio?

Big airport with flights to almost everywhere in the country, plenty of hotel rooms, a decently walkable city

Only the Strip and the western end of Fremont are walkable. The rest of the metri is spread out in a big valley. You need a car to get around.

Anywhere with hotels and parking.

New York City, Portland, or Seattle

What's funny is that depending on the time of year, it would literally be cheaper to fly to Europe to watch US champs than figure out Eugene accommodations.

The proposed Permanent, Annual, Summer Olympic in L.A. would feature a 70,000 seat Sphere at LAX/Inglewood, cost $40 Billion, and would be used 52 Fridays, Saturdays, and Sundays each year guaranteed.