The myth of the “casual fan” in track and field

I think this is such a great point because it is really amusing that, at least for the track/ distance side of things, is literally the simplest sport in terms of who wins, the event commentators spend the most time explaining how it works when the audience, as mentioned, basically all already know a decent amount about running. I think if the casual fan tuned in (yes they do exist, but probably are only watching the Olympics) they too can understand the basics just by sheer common sense. If they are intrigued, they maybe will seek out more info and may even eventually wind up looking at this website (God bless them).

Also agree that entertaining commentators are essential. Think about the NBA: Van Gundy, people like Stephen A on pre game, Charles Barkley and Shaq on half time, etc. NFL: Aikman, Michaels, Romo, Collinsworth, Buck, etc. They keep us entertained pretty much the whole time and create a fun atmosphere for the viewer while also giving us all the info that we need to know (no explanations of what a 2pt conversion is or a technical foul). Did really enjoy listening to the British commentators during the world and olympic feeds compared to NBC- not perfect but MUCH better. Bigger focus on all the athletes not just the Americans (I am one but enough is enough sometimes).

I liked how "not triggering a diplomatic incident" was one of the criteria in this thread for a good sport (!).

and that's a problem. This sport has that purist reputation.

Most sports are having issues with live attendance.

Some of my college lacrosse fan buddies are all upset at the lack of numbers at NCAA playoff games.

MLB made some major moves to get more people to watch.

I competed at a high level (Nationally for a smaller European country), I coach, I’m a huge fan, yet at our State Championships I only watched 400m and above (with the exception of a 100m and 200m girls’ race because of an athlete who won the 100m, 200m, 400m, and 800m). When the hurdles or 100m, etc. came around I would find other things to do.

Ever been to a Dodgers/Giants game?

To be a fan one has to enjoy something. Fan is supposedly short for fanatic so how is that person not interested?

And Norway is a small country with far fewer entertainment and sports options.

In baseball though every swing is a potential for something to happen. Watch a game and when a batter hits a deep drive listen for the crowd reaction.

In a 10,000m race there is very little of that excitement/anticipation 2000m in.

Baseball had some room to make adjustments (the pitch clock being a great addition---and I was a huge baseball fan when I was younger) to make the game move less slowly. Track meets, to me, have less room for speeding things up short of not offering events and that move is underway. I don't think a Diamond League meet has had a 10,000 in years and the 5000 seems uncommon as well.

You have to have enough women in the stands to have a kiss cam except for the huge gay population of course that loves track.

Track and field simply needs more exposure in the media. The sports shows on TV don’t cover it like the major sport that it is. News organizations follow suit and don’t cover it at all, they treat it like a minor sport.

In reality, it is the largest sport in the United States. There are more track athletes than any other sport. That means there are more Track parents, and more track alumni than any other sport. Media needs to cover it proportionally. They are missing out on the largest untapped audience demographic in the country.
We just need appropriate coverage, nobody wants it to be like football coverage, that is beyond ridiculous.
Track doesn’t need to dip into the degenerate beer drinkers* or scummy gamblers to become popular, this is the healthiest sport and should be a beacon of health for the sporting community, like they are on some college campuses. The audience should be people interested in health, performance and pure high level competition without referees or arbitrary rules getting in the way.

*I am a beer drinker, but only occasionally degenerate.

The worst possible thing you can do is dumb the sport down for a perceived audience of American housewives (a demographic that perhaps doesn’t even exist in reality anymore as an economic force.)

Interesting take as that is exactly what MNF did and they claim that's what made it so popular

There are two ways to look at this. One is that unless you're fairly unusual and are really interested in ALL events, and I do know people like this though not many, watching a track meet means a fair amount of time watching something you don't like. The other way is to say that because of the wide variety of events included there will be SOME events that you do like. Personally, I consider watching sprints as the price I pay to get to see the distance events. But here's another thing. While sprints generally don't interest me, when I went to my kids' high school meets I was interested in the sprints, not for the events themselves but for how they'd affect which team was going to win the meet.

When people suggest selling beer. How would having booze at the concessions attract the casual? Like I have no issue with serving alcohol but why would a non track fan attend a track meet for the beer? Like it’s not readily available at literary everywhere else.

There's a solution that's rarely ever considered that could build professional track & field into a popular spectator activity: Make it into a true team sport, palatable to an average sport's fan's attention span. Two to two-and-a-half hour meets. Concurrent field and running events. A combination of relays and individual events. Team points for placing, as well as bonus points for tiered time and distance achievements.

Require, say, 20% minimum of the talent to be state/region-grown. Beer, hot dogs, chipotle bowls, sushi in the stands. Consider multi-team competition at each event, not merely dual or tri-meets; whatever is manageable. Start with say, 12 core teams: 2 from California, 1 Pacific Northwest, 2 Texas, 1 Mountain State, 2 Northeast, 2 Southeast, 2 Midwest, or some other configuration, and divide into two conferences, West and East. 6 'regular season' meets, 1 playoff semifinal meet each conference, 1 dual meet championship.

Build teams with enough talent and depth so that individual performers only have to compete in, say, half of the regular season meets to qualify as team members. Lease existing stadium space, get sponsorship money to pay athletes scaled pay for each meet competed, plus bonuses for individual performances attained, points contributed towards team wins (more for playoff wins). Lots of advertising on singlets, shorts, warmup suits, around the interior of the track, etc. Hire announcers with the chops of a Phil Liggett & Paul Sherwin duo to promote spectator awareness, knowledge, and excitement. Introduce performers before each meet (especially the stars) with some flourish.

For the meet-ending relay(s), allow top-paying spectators to enter the infield and root for their relay performers alongside the track, inside roped boundaries. Have a few security guards posted on site for good measure. Actually provide a track PA system that works.

Just a few ideas for starters. Yes, domestic and international meet schedules will be disrupted. Obviously. Work with those the best you can, think outside the box. The goal is to promote track and field for everyone, draw multitudes more fans to the sport. I mean, what is more basic to every human being and admirer of athletic form and performance than running, jumping, and throwing?

Shoot, the possibilities are endless. During the, say, 2 and a half hour competition, you could have team members racing the marathon distance on a circuit course video streamed to your phone that would be timed to end right after the last team relay event; marathoners chosen from a decent sized stable of runners each meet so as not to burn talent out. Imagine 3-4 male 2:13-2:16 type male and 2:30-2:38 type female marathoners each straining towards the stadium finish line to give their entire team that chance at a victory and a higher payday for their side. Exciting, huh?

Track fans need to accept that it's a niche sport and act "better then" about it.

Kind of like soccer fans twenty years ago.

Who cares if the masses like it?

The walmart crowd is never going to like track or running, be happy about that!!!!

It's a small elite sport for the best athletes in the world

I don't want to tell you how to run your business, but this is how to run your business:

Sound on.

https://twitter.com/bolderboulder/status/1663247047468765185https://twitter.com/bolderboulder/status/1663244878061395968

We have a minor league, Double A, baseball team and they're lucky if 200 people attend.

It's sad but I think it's similar elsewhere.

They even have gimmicks. It used to work but not anymore.

Even in college football, if it's not a major game there are very few people there. Smaller colleges draw very few.

College baseball, lacrosse, etc, nothing.

The average Hobby Jogger has to be educated in the sport.

Example: The average 27 minute 5K runner has no clue who the top runners are.

The average 90-100 golfer knows who they are and watches the PGA.

Bring those people into the sport and you have a huge fan base.

Maybe locally owned running stores could be involved in promoting the sport?