SDSU Aztec wrote:
I like track just the way it is. It seems like you should find some other sports to follow.
Just the way it is - NICHE. So niche you tell people to follow other sports so you can be one of the only fans!
That's one way to keep ticket prices low, I guess. As long as you can afford to travel . If not, maybe you can at least afford to subscribe to the niche broadcasters like NBC Gold and Flotrack because they don't show your niche sport on normal TV.
kmkom wrote:
The advent of technology and to a lesser extant obesity has driven down the respect of running and pedestrianism. 150 years ago it was all the rave. Gambling, and front page news. In another 150 years running will be obsolete.
Track exploded in popularity in the 40's and 50's when people could watch news clips of races and world records.
The 60's and 70's and early 80's were even more popular, and in the UK, even guys who never won global championships such as Roger Black were household names.
The reality is that athletics popularity declined almost the exact moment that Africans started to dominate from 1987. The clear doping and enhanced performances of the 90's almost killed it as a major sport.
Things are changing now, and tech is actually helping, from super shoes making EPO WRs breakable again, to Strava and social media fuelling a participation boom.
Athletics is a unique sport in that the different 'disciplines' are almost different sports. In fact field events and track ARE different sports entirely, and really so is sprinting and distance running. You can have zero interest in shot putt as a distance running fan and have to sit through watching field events while waiting for the 5000m to come on. There's no easy solution to that, except being ruthless and making at least Diamond League events track only.
However, track is horribly marketed. It must be the only sport in the world in which few if any of the stars have nicknames.
zxcvzxcv wrote:
kmkom wrote:
The advent of technology and to a lesser extant obesity has driven down the respect of running and pedestrianism. 150 years ago it was all the rave. Gambling, and front page news. In another 150 years running will be obsolete.
Track exploded in popularity in the 40's and 50's when people could watch news clips of races and world records.
The 60's and 70's and early 80's were even more popular, and in the UK, even guys who never won global championships such as Roger Black were household names.
The reality is that athletics popularity declined almost the exact moment that Africans started to dominate from 1987. The clear doping and enhanced performances of the 90's almost killed it as a major sport.
Things are changing now, and tech is actually helping, from super shoes making EPO WRs breakable again, to Strava and social media fuelling a participation boom.
Athletics is a unique sport in that the different 'disciplines' are almost different sports. In fact field events and track ARE different sports entirely, and really so is sprinting and distance running. You can have zero interest in shot putt as a distance running fan and have to sit through watching field events while waiting for the 5000m to come on. There's no easy solution to that, except being ruthless and making at least Diamond League events track only.
However, track is horribly marketed. It must be the only sport in the world in which few if any of the stars have nicknames.
Yeah blame the Africans.
From the 70s to the 90s pro sports became a business. In this time the NFL and NBA became huge along with college football.
Track just got left behind because it lacks professionalism.
Any sport in which the Olympics is your key competition is amateur hour.
Alan
krispy kremlin._._._._. wrote:
2. It doesn't allow gambling (game changer)
Never thought of this
Why not?
Why isn't.....Archery....Diving....Swimming....Olympic Lifting....Wresting....Gymnastics.....and a dozen other sports more popular?
Because they are "Olympic Sports".....
Wrestlers at least have MMA now if they want to become a "pro" and earn a living. A solid wrestling background really lends itself to MMA success.
Alan
Bad Wigins wrote:
SDSU Aztec wrote:
I like track just the way it is. It seems like you should find some other sports to follow.
Just the way it is - NICHE. So niche you tell people to follow other sports so you can be one of the only fans!
That's one way to keep ticket prices low, I guess. As long as you can afford to travel . If not, maybe you can at least afford to subscribe to the niche broadcasters like NBC Gold and Flotrack because they don't show your niche sport on normal TV.
It has nothing to do with marketing. For someone with no competitive distance racing or coaching experience, the sport is boring. There are even some LR posters who seem to find 5/10K races on the track to be unwatchable.
In regard to some other poster comments, beer and gambling will not make T&F popular. Gambling would only bring some sleaze to the sport.
BekeleKip wrote:
Because everyone can do it. It's not a difficult skill.
Hitting a home run. Throwing a 100 mph fastball. Throwing a football 70 yards. Skating and scoring a goal. All difficult tasks to the average person.
Anyone can throw a ball, anyone can score a goal, anyone can run? Your point?
Not everyone can throw 100mph ball, not everyone can run a 4:10 mile.
Stupid arguement..
BruhCheck wrote:
BekeleKip wrote:
Because everyone can do it. It's not a difficult skill.
Hitting a home run. Throwing a 100 mph fastball. Throwing a football 70 yards. Skating and scoring a goal. All difficult tasks to the average person.
Anyone can throw a ball, anyone can score a goal, anyone can run? Your point?
Not everyone can throw 100mph ball, not everyone can run a 4:10 mile.
Stupid arguement..
Yeah, I can drive a car, but I will need to be paid to watch NASCAR. I do like watching watching F1, though.
a runner wrote:Too much metric system, it’s confounding.
Only for Americans. The rest of the world uses the metric system very well. Perhaps the US needs to join the rest of the world?
The avg person does not play basketball, baseball, football, soccer or drive a race car, yet finds something compelling enough in these sports to watch hours of it on tv and attend games.
If you're not into running its a dull, boring monotonous sport. Whats the thrill in watching 2 hrs of a marathon..to see if someone makes a break after 20miles, or if there is a spring finish? WHO CARES, outside of runners?
Runners themselves arent exciting, esp distance runners. Thin, introverted, tired looking, non charismatic types who spend their days running or resting. Who can relate to them?
Lastly in terms of money, who makes anything in comparison to the avg basketball or tennis star? Is there any sport that gives a lower return on investment than distance running for the average pro? 1000's of miles run for a pittance.
Other than the sprint events, it doesn't require explosive speed. It doesn't require agility or coordination. It doesn't really require thinking or strategy.
Runningart2004 wrote:
Individual sports are only popular in the US when a US player is dominant....golf...tennis...etc.
Golf and tennis are usually only popular to people who play or played them, while basketball and football are popular to people who play or played them as well as people who've never played them.
Because Americans are lazy and simple minded. They need games that are about quick burst and lots of walking and standing around. Perhaps some ball scratching. Now, if an American is good at an endurance sport then they’ll tune in yearly or every 4 years to vicariously live the glory but they need to be entertained with bells and whistles and timeouts and music blaring and a screen full of stats and more distractions.
rojo wrote:
Just Another Hobby Jogger wrote:
Most people get excited about sports when it's their school, city or country against "them."
That's why track is glorified during the Olympics, but not any other time.
And we have a winner.
People like to have teams to root for or against. At LetsRun we try to let you know the runners so you can root for or against someone but the thing with running is there is no singel winner or loser. At a team event, you go and your team wins or loses. At running, it's muddled as there are like 20 events going on at once.
And if your runner who was supposed to get7th gets third, is that a win or a loss. As a fan, it's nto the same.
But the bigger issue is there is a) no radanomness in the results or b) strategy.
In track, there is one moment when a runner gets ahead and that's almsot always it. In a team sport, it's back and forth.
Yes, this. Plus the individuals run in whatever shoe company-sponsored kit regardless of any sort of affiliation. It's hard for me to root for someone I'm unfamiliar with based on that. Oh I guess I like Nike, so root for the Nike athlete? Boring.
Having teams would allow a sustained brand, regardless of who comes and goes on the roster. Personally, I enjoy watching college meets more because of this. Why is it so hard to have pro teams that are separate from shoe companies?
Life must just be one long string of disappointments if you have a baseline need for others to glorify your leisure activities.