She made her first Olympic team, placed high at the London Marathon, and is very young in her career/has lots of potential left. She doesn't seem happy about them dropping her either based on her strava comment replies.
I just don't see why you'd drop one of the best American women marathoners. Makes no sense to me.
Why Would Saucony Drop Molly Seidel?
Pro News/Info/Results
Marathons
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
Nobody buys saucony shoes because of her. More like in spite of her.
-
Shoe sponsors do it as a competition with other manufacturers. It does not impact sales.
-
Well she likely won't run a meaningful race until the Olympics where she won't wear Saucony gear. But remember, this is a very normal time for a contract to end, at the end of an olympic year.
They were always going to have competition to resign her. She is a free agent. Not all teams can resign their free agents, there are other teams at play. -
The word resign means to voluntarily leave a position.
-
Most likely someone else (Puma) offered her more money and Saucony did not feel like the value was there so they chose not to match it.
-
Those that follow the sport more seriously will recognize that Saucony is clearing house. Ben True was also dropped. They are either offering lower contracts or dropping athletes. Seidel wasn’t dropped. She was offered an amount that was not competitive with other offers she received.
-
dhehsisub wrote:
Those that follow the sport more seriously will recognize that Saucony is clearing house. Ben True was also dropped. They are either offering lower contracts or dropping athletes. Seidel wasn’t dropped. She was offered an amount that was not competitive with other offers she received.
She wrote on Strava that Saucony chose not to re-sign her. It’s possible she was being coy and meant they lowballed, but that’s not the impression given. -
Re-signing means changing the date on the contract and signing it for another year. Offering a new contract at a lower rate is the likely follow-on to not re-signing.
-
I mean, think about the impact that COVID had on the economy. Think about all the struggling businesses. Now I don't have any insight into Saucony's performance in particular, but it doesn't seem all that ridiculous to think that they might have realized slightly lower revenues for FY20 and are trimming back the marketing budget a little for FY21. Top of that list would be distance runner salaries (I would guess). It is unfortunate, but that's life. Luckily, it is a free market, and if they have value to offer a company (which they do), then they will get another contract offer (which they did).
Personally, I'm looking forward to Puma getting serious in the distance running shoe market. The high stack height carbon plate shoes really mess with my feet and knees, so I would welcome some new options. -
its like a love movie: when you love someone you have to let them go, even when its the hardest thing to do
-
People who scour over Strava comments have a social disorder.
-
Shoey Guy wrote:
Re-signing means changing the date on the contract and signing it for another year. Offering a new contract at a lower rate is the likely follow-on to not re-signing.
Re-sign certainly does happen with new terms, it happens all the damn time in pro sports. Extension would be more in line with what you suggest. At any rate, Saucony is just mismanaged. They overpay someone like Laura Thweatt and somehow (maybe as a result) don't have the means to compete openly for someone they had originally nabbed on the cheap like Seidel. They definitely don't have the global income and thus budget to compete with names like Puma, Adidas, Nike, or even Skechers if any of them come with an offer. They're more of a family brand, a cottage label. Nothing wrong with that, but even at that level they look up at New Balance, Asics, UnderArmour despite having great product that competes well in the marketplace. Is Freedom TC still a thing? -
Because nobody in the world know what Saucony is, and nobody knows who Molly is, and it's easy to point at the "economy" now even though a lot of areas aren't suffering.
-
She is still listed on Saucony's website,, for some reason.
-
Saucony currently has no one with half a clue running sports marketing. The person they have "managing" athlete contracts right now has zero experience. Expect other big news soon.
-
Yes sire wrote:
Well she likely won't run a meaningful race until the Olympics where she won't wear Saucony gear. But remember, this is a very normal time for a contract to end, at the end of an olympic year.
They were always going to have competition to resign her. She is a free agent. Not all teams can resign their free agents, there are other teams at play.
It's not a good look for Saucony at all. Way to take care of your star athletes. -
Ditto - on both points
-
I think Puma probably just offered her more money.
-
@TheRunningEffect wrote:
She made her first Olympic team, placed high at the London Marathon, and is very young in her career/has lots of potential left. She doesn't seem happy about them dropping her either based on her strava comment replies.
I just don't see why you'd drop one of the best American women marathoners. Makes no sense to me.
What has she been saying on her Strava comment replies?
