It has become very clear that we are now starting to catch up to the Worlds best in the middle and long distance events with the younger generation of athletes putting together amazing performances.
It just always puzzles me, however, that similar to other sports like basketball and football, the top athletes get moved along into the NCAA to make money for the school and program and then go pro to make almost no money in most cases. There are rare cases like Drew Hunter, Noah Lyles, or Alan Webb that bypassed the system, but why do we need the NCAA in the first place?
I think marketability matters in track and I think one of the best things for the sport would be a mass exodus of top runners out of the NCAA system and be able to market themselves. Once that happens I believe that the younger up and coming generations will see those athletes as inspirations and would potentially choose track over football, basketball and baseball.
There’s no doubt we as a country have the athletic talent to compete for Olympic and championship medals in every event, but a lot of top athletes just aren’t choosing track due to the lack of money and exposure.
What’s everyone’s thoughts? Is the NCAA a road block for future progress in American track and field? Or is it a necessary step in development of these top athletes?
If we got rid of the NCAA would it benefit our athletic potential?
College Running
D1
Report Thread
You are reporting this thread to the moderators for review and possible removal from the forum.
-
-
No. There are no roadblocks to athletes bypassing the NCAA and the US is the best country in the world in track and field. No question.
-
Based on revenue we'll always have Men's Football, Men's Basketball, and Women's Volleyball. Not to worry. That's all the NCAA in Indianapolis needs to survive.
