This is interesting, and it got me thinking as to why F1/NASCAR is so popular versus something like track. There are a number of factors, not least of which is 1)speed of racers 2) inherent danger of the sport-i.e. spectacular crashes 3)$$$$ and top car brands trying to push the tech envelope. I think that will always be a hinderance to the sport. There's no collisions. Secondly, something that's not great is that each event is short in duration. Football game, soccer, basketball, tennis, F1, golf, all these take hours to play a game/round/race, etc. In athletics, you have each individual athlete competing for 10s-27mins. Not be negative but that is a hindrance.
But aside from that, the GST and DM it's the same setting time after time-the oval track. In F1 at least you have different tracks and courses. Athletics could do something similar. This is more viable for the distance events than sprints, but I could foresee having doing a sprint event up a steep hill or famous stretch of road (eg. Filbert St in SanFrancisco). Instead of having every race on an oval track, they should mix it up, more cross country style. Have odd distances that promote racing and not just time trialing. Have a 2.3k race on trail/grass. 7.2k on a scenic road in Venice. Have some events on the track as well for those fast times.
Anyways, food for thought.