Used to live outside of Boston and as much as Harvard is made fun of for being elitist they were the most accommodating to local clubs. They had a morning and evening block for indoor track access every day. I’m not sure what it’s like now post Covid restrictions.
Even though a public university might be funded primarily by a government (and thus by taxes paid by citizens) they can still operate like a business where they charge fees to use their services and facilities.
That is especially true with indoor facilities like the NAU Dome.
Name any public university where the general public has free access to and use of the chemistry lab, gym, pool, auditorium, weight room, etc.? Name a public university where the general public is permitted to enroll in classes at no charge?
Not surprising that public universities restrict and charge fees for the public to access tracks.
Public high schools are almost totally funded by local governments (and taxes paid by local citizens. And unlike public universities, students that attend public high schools do not pay large amounts of money for tuition and fees to attend those high schools.
But public high schools also rarely if ever allow the general public free access to things like science labs, gyms, pools, auditoriums, etc.
Some schools used to allow the general public to use certain outdoor facilities free of charge. This was more common when those facilities consisted of natural grass athletic fields and dirt, cinder or asphalt running tracks. But as the quality and cost of those outdoor facilities increased, access has been restricted if allowed at all.
The cost of a decent 8 lane all weather running track can easily exceed $1 million. It is understandable that schools would want to exclude, limit and or regulate public access to a facility like that to protect their investment.
No one seriously argues that a college track should be open to outsiders during team practice. Leaving it otherwise open builds a running community that helps to sustain the college track team as well in the long-term, from developing running in the area.
No it doesn’t. What it does is enable the older crowd with that false sense of entitlement to feel like lane 1 is their private space for a power walk and don’t dare get within 10 feet of them.
here's a good example of a typical day at Lumberjack Stadium.
this is a HOKA video shot right before the Paris Olympics. you can see Smith training with Louis and Abdi - you'd think with an event as important as the Olympics he'd want the entire track to himself. but no, theres HOKA, Mission, and a bunch of random high schoolers and hobby joggers all sharing the track. everyone getting along just fine. this is pretty much how it is every day at Lumberjack Stadium and the Dome. competitors training side by side. no one excluded.
Believe me, if they wanted to NAU could be total a-holes and force all non NAU runners to find another track but they bend over backwards for everyone. Smith and Cornfield know how few tracks there are in Flag and they've always been generous. when Jakob Ingebrigtsen was here he wanted to train late at night and they went out of their way to accommodate.
Whenever I hear parents/community members complain about not having access to our track, even though it belongs to the "community", I explain it's also the school's responsibility to protect community assets.
Whenever I hear parents/community members complain about not having access to our track, even though it belongs to the "community", I explain it's also the school's responsibility to protect community assets.
Do a fartlek on the roads and settle down.
the roads are for cars. We should restrict access.
Hard to argue that a university should have to allow public access. If it were open to the public and free you'd get dog walkers, kids on bikes, etc. But the public should have some kind of place to run repeats - ideally a track. There are tons of open basketball courts and soccer fields anyone can use. You can pay to golf in any city in the US. But to use a track? Good luck, you'll probably have to beg or climb a fence.
Most runners would be willing to pay for track access, but that opportunity is rarely available - tracks are just closed to all but scholastic teams, maybe a couple clubs. $20 does seem steep to use a track - but that is what women (and some men) pay for barre and yoga classes. They should do some kind of season or annual pass unless the goal is just to keep people off without actually keeping people off.
we have one public track in my area and it's used for everything but running (loose dogs, kids riding bikes/scooters, even cricket players (you'd think they'd use the infield or grass fields lining the track). I don't know how pros do it unless they are linked with a university. I can get away with sneaking on the local hs track but it's before school starts and that's 5am - 7am and they still have a security guard walking around at that hour. Luckily he leaves me alone as long as I'm out before 7am.
Exactly . Every college I know here in the Northeast has times when the public is allowed to use. And even if they don't have an official designated time, you rarely see anyone get scooted off unless there is a meet or practice.
It sounds like running is popular in the NE (Boston Marathon, November Project, etc.) so that may be part of it. Same as Portland's 3 tracks.
As I'm sure most are aware there's a large gradient between what top-level schools athletic departments can garner by way of brand support, and what lower-level schools can. To oversimplify there are Universities with massive contractual partnerships and there are schools simply on 'team deals' that get small product stipends and availability to purchase additional gear at cost or significantly reduced price. For example, University of Washington has a massive contractual deal with adidas and want for nothing. These deals are obviously driven by high visibility sports like basketball and football. Brands aren't doing this for charity. However, that halos to the smaller sports, and even lowly cross-country benefits greatly from these deals. UW runners never want for training gear and will routinely get new championship race kits ever year. The brand has employees embedded with the University forecasting and ordering product, and ensuring every need is covered. On the other side of the coin, the 'team deal' schools work with a team sales representative from the brand. They don't have dedicated brand employees supporting them. They order from online catalogs. They get the basics. Coach Smith used his own money to buy retail price adidas jackets from the brands .com site for his team. He purchased his own adidas travel shoes! He used his team's budgetary allotment to purchase new uniforms for National Championships. No one at adidas ever cared about the success of coach Smith and his team, and never so much as sent the team thank you gifts after their title wins. adidas treats NAU, and treated coach Smith, as second-class citizens. Yet, adidas acted like coach Smith wronged them when he left. Adidas had every opportunity to take care of coach Smith and build their own professional team in unison with NAU and did nothing. When Nike came calling, coach Smith had no choice but to accept. Yet, again, adidas was pissed. So much so that they are now trying to dictate to the University who can use their facilities. This is not coach Cornfield. This is adidas. Adidas is pressuring the university to not allow athletes from other brands to use their facilities. That is what is happening here. Don't put this on coach Cornfield. For those of us in town that use the track the best-case scenario is that Nike takes over the relationship with the entire athletic department. It wouldn't be hard. Adidas gives them next to nothing!
I am all for sneaking onto tracks to complete stealth workouts. I always thank the tracks profusely during my post-race interviews. C'mon, be cool, people. It's about respect. Track giveths and you must giveith back.
As I'm sure most are aware there's a large gradient between what top-level schools athletic departments can garner by way of brand support, and what lower-level schools can. To oversimplify there are Universities with massive contractual partnerships and there are schools simply on 'team deals' that get small product stipends and availability to purchase additional gear at cost or significantly reduced price. For example, University of Washington has a massive contractual deal with adidas and want for nothing. These deals are obviously driven by high visibility sports like basketball and football. Brands aren't doing this for charity. However, that halos to the smaller sports, and even lowly cross-country benefits greatly from these deals. UW runners never want for training gear and will routinely get new championship race kits ever year. The brand has employees embedded with the University forecasting and ordering product, and ensuring every need is covered. On the other side of the coin, the 'team deal' schools work with a team sales representative from the brand. They don't have dedicated brand employees supporting them. They order from online catalogs. They get the basics. Coach Smith used his own money to buy retail price adidas jackets from the brands .com site for his team. He purchased his own adidas travel shoes! He used his team's budgetary allotment to purchase new uniforms for National Championships. No one at adidas ever cared about the success of coach Smith and his team, and never so much as sent the team thank you gifts after their title wins. adidas treats NAU, and treated coach Smith, as second-class citizens. Yet, adidas acted like coach Smith wronged them when he left. Adidas had every opportunity to take care of coach Smith and build their own professional team in unison with NAU and did nothing. When Nike came calling, coach Smith had no choice but to accept. Yet, again, adidas was pissed. So much so that they are now trying to dictate to the University who can use their facilities. This is not coach Cornfield. This is adidas. Adidas is pressuring the university to not allow athletes from other brands to use their facilities. That is what is happening here. Don't put this on coach Cornfield. For those of us in town that use the track the best-case scenario is that Nike takes over the relationship with the entire athletic department. It wouldn't be hard. Adidas gives them next to nothing!
while this is true unfortunately its all about football. the more the football team generates the more non-revenue sports get. and at the end of the day NAU football is a mediocre FCS team. NAU XC could win 10 national championships in a row and Adidas would still treat them like garbage.
and what makes this more frustrating is Adidas seems to have no idea what they have in Flagstaff. they could have built an elite pro team to go with the college team and create something really special. I was stunned after all the success they had Adidas never thought about building a team there, at the very least an altitude training camp where Adidas athletes could go for a few months.
the good news is Nike is really passionate about running and now that they've created an outpost in Flag it might lead to them sponsoring NAU.
Nike has a history of being much more involved with non revenue sports than Adidas, especially track and field.
NAU is killing the whole running community? Being a little dramatic? Like what percentage of this Flagstaff Running Community is "getting killed"? For the most, most runners I know other than elites seem to like running/racing on the roads or XC more than the track and are not fans about running around an outdoor track let alone an indoor one. Were hundreds of people allowed on this track in the past?