The lack of track and field facilities at the University of Wisconsin is intentional

You made the assertion that 95% of D1s don't have an indoor track facility which you seemingly based off a partial list from Wikipedia. Sure we can take the burden of proof to prove you wrong but it doesn't stop us from thinking it's an asinine statement. The Wikipedia list doesn't even have one of the most successful D1 distance program from the last decade on it.

Hey I been there, said something dumb without really thinking it through but the ability to double down in idiotic fashion is a true skill - congratulations.

Like I said, there are 20 in Wisconsin and 20 in Iowa. Nearly every D3 college has an indoor track. Iowa has 4 D1 colleges. Iowa has a banked track, Iowa State has a 300 meter track, and UNI has a 200 meter track.

I would guess that there are close to 1000 indoor tracks in the US.

I remember this coming up long ago....

https://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=2780539

I doubt there's any comprehensive list of indoor tracks out there, and if there is one it doesn't show up on a Google search. Just here in the Boston area there are at least ten regulation 200m tracks (the four banked ones in Boston plus Brandeis, Tufts, MIT, Wellesley, Wheaton, and Philips Academy). The crappy list you presented us only lists one of those, and doesn't even have BU. There are also four banked tracks just in the Big Ten that don't show up on your list (Penn State, Michigan, Iowa, Indiana). All of the other cold weather Big Ten schools have at least a good flat 200m track except Northwestern, which still has access to the new Gately Center banked track.

Most colleges in Wisconsin have some type indoor track. Same with Iowa and Minnesota. There’s probably 30 indoor tracks just in these 3 states and a whole lot more if you count Illinois. I don’t have experience outside of these areas so I can’t speak for what type of track or training facilities exist outside of these states.

That Wikipedia link is clearly very wrong. Multiple people have stated this fact and even listed multiple universities with some type of indoor track.

Now does any of this prove Wisconsin needs its own indoor track? No, the proposed facility will probably work fine if they include areas for every event. UW already hosts their “home” indoor meets in Chicago.

There are 20 in Wisconsin alone.

Even if true, that obviously fake 95% number wouldn't be the right one to focus on. The more relevant denominator is the number of schools that actually need an indoor track for specific track training. It seems plausible that Wisconsin is in the top 5% of schools as far as that need goes. Of the schools that don't have adequate facilities, how many are in the far north? Answering that question (with actual reliable information) would make the Wisconsin situation look far more pathological.

Does FSU need an indoor track? The low's in the 60s in Tallahasee, worst that happens is they get rained on. Does Wisconsin? The high is 28F in Madison, it'll routinely get down below 20F, and it gets really icy outdoors. Way different.

Nebraska isn't a track school though. Nebraska is a field school. Nebraska scores their points in the throws and jumps, not the sprints.

You’re right, you don’t have to stand in the ruins of the Shell to see that the AD/admin sees track as nothing more than a drain on the athletic department. Every dollar they spend on track is a dollar that doesn’t go into football, and they need money to compete. So, they are making track disappear.

This seems bad but idk if it can really be seen as a move to get rid of the teams. The school is making a choice for football, at the expense of training facilities for other athletes. I don't like the decision but football/basketball are the only two real revenue generating sports in college.

I don't think the D3 model is a bad one basically for any non revenue generating sports. Conferences are way too big and spread out. I went to a small D1 school in the northeast & they race all of the bigger meets that require significant travel. I wouldn't mind seeing more dual type meets and bigger regional meets until conference & NCAAs. It's a cost for the whole college. That money could be pumped somewhere else if they could drive to Boston instead of flying to Wisconsin. But I get it, other teams get to travel all the time. I just don't think it's a bad idea to compete locally. Would like to see conference realignment for non revenue generated sports so that they can compete against all the schools around them. Football conference realignment is nonsense for a sport like XC. Why is Oregon racing B10 schools at their conference champs.

That list has many, many omissions, from D3 Haverford's indoor track to D1 indoor tracks like Lehigh and UPENN's brand new one

Even putting aside the college team's need for an indoor track, Madison is a pretty big metro area to not have a single track available for high schools and the general community. Do they even have high school indoor track in Wisconsin? Seems like you could have a good league with all the indoor tracks spread around the state at the DIII UW system schools. Except that you now have this big gap in the center around Madison.

When I was in high school in Connecticut in the 90s we had a number of tracks within easy driving distance - Yale, Central, Southern, Wesleyan, UConn, Smith, Coast Guard, plus several shorter tracks at high schools. Since then they've added a dedicated high school-focused track in New Haven. As a consequence there was a robust competitive indoor track scene, and you didn't have kids getting out of shape or quitting the sport altogether over the winter.

MSU has an indoor track, though it is flat, and would never ever host a meet there. It's at least a place to train

This narrative is false and being pushed by Jerry and his cronies….throw Nuttycombe in there too. When UW won an ncaa indoor title, the head coach should have marched into Barry Alvarez’ office and demand a new indoor facility. Problem is, he didnt and now the current staff have been lied to by the administration. All sports at Wisconsin have had scholarships taken from them (except FB, BB, VB). I bet you didnt know that. Is that Mick Byrnes fault also? How about you hold Chris McIntosh to the fire, rather than attacking a staff that has no control over their future. Stop pushing BS narratives and state the actual facts!

The Shell was always sort of an extension of Camp Randall.

I think what people are most upset about is the history The Shell holds. Whether reporting to the facility for practice and home meets including Big Ten Indoor Championships or the beloved Madison West Relays for high schoolers that had a rich 80-90 year history or the USTFF/TFA indoor state championships only add to moments of glory felt in the confines of those walls.

It was an ultimate Big Ten fieldhouse. Smells of icey hot, echoes from spectators bouncing off the walls, old school college pennants from the 40s-50s hanging above the scoreboard with pride and the detailed school record board populated with UW greats.

Space and upkeep was becoming an issue in the past 25 years. A few key people also retired that would be more invested in oushing back had they been in an active role.

What happens next?

Well, if we can get the money -- which track & field is not notorious for doing-- we should build a new outdoor track & field stadium in the outskirts (i.e. Verona, Monona Grove, Sun Prairie) and refactor the existing McClimon outdoor track into a 300 meter indoor track (i.e. The McClimon Center or "new Shell").

This is what leads me, a lifelong distnce running enthusiast, to see the other side of the argument here. It sucks but it is also the reality.

Which leads me to a similarly related topic.

For the past 40 or so years many people involved with the high school level in Wisconsin track & field assume it is their god given, constitutionally granted right to have a sport, expect pay (and complain about not having more pay) and then also expect to have respective facilities that are well maintained by the universities and athletic departments. But, at the WIAA level, the expenditures for varsity sports showed as recent as 2020-21 that both cross country and track & field operate at a huge $300k deficit while the ball sports turnover a net positive that, in fact, pays for your sports. So the age old arguments "my sport is your sport's punishment", "running vs ball sports" and "jocks vs revenge of the nerds" are moot. So are the ignorant belief systems of some coaches that "everything in track should be free" which only digs their own cause more into a hole.

It is one thing to be passionate but it is another to be delusional.

To those people involved, you need to collectively garner support and show the athletic bodies the money instead of having grandiose expectations and historical-based entitlement to your sport. Most dont know how to do that for themselves (we all know who you are). You cant just rely on putting your hands out to big money donors or putting everyone's $50 in a hat expecting it to succeed or going on social media to crowd source from parents. We need to build a business model around these sports that churns out a profit so that we can pay our own way and that burden is mainly on the coaching staffs & committees, university alumni and also some part on athletic departments (but dont hold your breath as seen in The UW Shell).

Once we have our own money, we can do as we please. So show me the money.

great post by Jerry.

Questions:

Why doesn't WIAA run indoor track as HS sport? Does this impact decision to downgrade indoor track as UW?

I totally agree that track needs to think about money. Pole Vault example is way to expensive and costs way more than the value. Only about 5-10% of college programs should even have it. Weight throw is another. It's not an olympic event, very expensive for indoors...

They do run indoor. And they hold an indoor state meet at Whitewater.

"The Shell was always sort of an extension of Camp Randall." What the heck is that supposed to even mean? It's a college sports facility that happens to be next to other college sports facilities. As they often are.

There was a plan at one point to put a new track in the McClain Center (current indoor football practice facility), which is big enough for a regulation indoor track and would have been a nice cheap option. But I guess they changed their minds and decided they wanted to tear that down as well to build football locker and weight rooms. Why they needed a massive block-sized parcel for those instead of fitting them under and around the stadium, don't ask me. Football arms race I guess. That still leaves an empty grass field north of the stadium which I guess we're saving for posterity or something.

And if they can't fit a new track around Camp Randall, there's plenty of space near the outdoor track. I have no idea why you're suggesting tearing that up and moving it out to Verona.

I couldn't even follow your last two paragraphs. You seem to be conflating high school and college sports funding or something.