Okay, I'm prepared to take a beating for being an idiot, but I don't understand the following comment on the LetsRun homepage:
"No one puts on a meet like Eugene but having every big meet there is going to kill Eugene enthusiasm's for track. The only positive will be it will help Oregon's recruiting."
Is the implication that overexposure will cause Eugene T&F fans to lose interest? If so, that seems an absurd notion. If not, what does the comment mean?
Thanks.
Have you payed attention at all this year?
Not a Duck Basher wrote:
Is the implication that overexposure will cause Eugene T&F fans to lose interest?
Thanks.
Yes, I think that's quite clear, and a logical conclusion.
What is it about it that troubles you?
haha, YO wrote:
Have you payed attention at all this year?
I guess I should be embarrassed but, no, I haven't been paying attention.
OldXCguy wrote:Yes, I think that's quite clear, and a logical conclusion.
What is it about it that troubles you?
I'm not troubled, just confused. I live in an area that is far from being a track and field hotbed, and I would give my left nut to have championship meets in my town every year. Considering that Eugene is the so-called Track City USA, I find it hard to believe that fans would get burned out by hosting annual champs.
they hosted the Olympic Track trials in 2008. They averaged 20,000 fans or so PER DAY for those trials.
Then, after having their usual cadre of home meets, they hosted the Pac10 meet in 09, followed two weeks later by the West regional meet. Followed four (?) weeks later by the USA championships. They averaged right at 9,000 per day for the USA champs in 09.
Too many big meets in the same place dilutes the importance and luster of each meet. The US champs should rotate to different venues. Sacramento alwyays put on a good one. Indianapolis is a good, except for the inevitable rain delays.
mighty porn stache wrote:
they hosted the Olympic Track trials in 2008. They averaged 20,000 fans or so PER DAY for those trials.
Then, after having their usual cadre of home meets, they hosted the Pac10 meet in 09, followed two weeks later by the West regional meet. Followed four (?) weeks later by the USA championships. They averaged right at 9,000 per day for the USA champs in 09.
Too many big meets in the same place dilutes the importance and luster of each meet. The US champs should rotate to different venues. Sacramento alwyays put on a good one. Indianapolis is a good, except for the inevitable rain delays.
That was my oversight. I failed to consider the other "big" meets being hosted. (Not to mention the current economy.) Thanks for knocking some sense into me.
haha, YO wrote:
Have you payed attention at all this year?
No, but I have PAID attention.
My work is done here.
I completely agree w/ the letsrun comment. Is it fair to have it at a single school for the next nine years? I find it hard to imagine that no other school is wanting to bid on this. I think other places could provide a great experience/atmosphere for the event and provide some diversity of championship sites.
MC Grammar wrote:
haha, YO wrote:Have you payed attention at all this year?
No, but I have PAID attention.
My work is done here.
Thanks, I was thinking it was PAID but I wasn't sure. Just didn't look right. Now I know, and knowing is half the battle.
haha, YO wrote:
Now I know, and knowing is half the battle.
Geeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
Jooooooooooooeeeeeeeeeeeee!
ncaatrackandfeldfan wrote:
I completely agree w/ the letsrun comment. Is it fair to have it at a single school for the next nine years? I find it hard to imagine that no other school is wanting to bid on this. I think other places could provide a great experience/atmosphere for the event and provide some diversity of championship sites.
So what's your opinion of the NCAA XC Champs being held in Terre Haute for multiple consecutive years? Given that Indiana State/Terre Haute is not a high profile venue for other meets, do you see this any differently than multiple championships being held in Eugene? Just curious.
Maybe with more meets in Eugene, they will put the women's steeple to the correct height and no one will get injured.
Good thought. I didn't mention it because this was about the spring nationals. My personal opinion though is that the NCAA D1 Cross Country Meet should move to a different location sometime soon, there are other sites around the country that I believe would be great locations. I'd also like to see the indoor meet move around more, glad to see it go to A&M this year. Indoors is more difficult because of the facilities, but there are some 200 meter indoor facilities in other regions that would be suitable (has NCAA's ever been to the NYC Armory? Maybe the spectator seating wouldn't be sufficient...)
mighty porn stache wrote:
they hosted the Olympic Track trials in 2008. They averaged 20,000 fans or so PER DAY for those trials.
Then, after having their usual cadre of home meets, they hosted the Pac10 meet in 09, followed two weeks later by the West regional meet. Followed four (?) weeks later by the USA championships. They averaged right at 9,000 per day for the USA champs in 09.
Too many big meets in the same place dilutes the importance and luster of each meet. The US champs should rotate to different venues. Sacramento alwyays put on a good one. Indianapolis is a good, except for the inevitable rain delays.
Track meets in Indy are a thing of the past. That track is gone.
Not a Duck Basher wrote:
[quote]ncaatrackandfeldfan wrote:
I completely agree w/ the letsrun comment. Is it fair to have it at a single school for the next nine years? I find it hard to imagine that no other school is wanting to bid on this. I think other places could provide a great experience/atmosphere for the event and provide some diversity of championship sites.
So what's your opinion of the NCAA XC Champs being held in Terre Haute for multiple consecutive years? Given that Indiana State/Terre Haute is not a high profile venue for other meets, do you see this any differently than multiple championships being held in Eugene? Just curious.
Well if you are going to get all logical on people...
Listen, having more meets in Eugene will be better for track, far better than having them in Sacto where it is smoggy, and dead most days accept the finals.
As to the idea that Eugene somehow under delivered in attendance at USA's this year...
You cannot compare an Olympic Trials to a USA's.
Why? One should not have to explain it.
What makes up the attendance at a track meet?
Well, a significant number of the attendees are family members, teammates and friends. Generally, history shows that more people qualify for an Olympic Trials, than do a USA Nationals. Additionally, the Olympic Trials are a bigger deal. A big enough deal that some athletes and families will stick around after their event, to watch some of the Trials. I know I did, and several of my friends as well.
I think that having more meets in Eugene, will actually have the opposite effect -- increasing interest.
Also note that the NCAA's, when they take place before school is out in Eugene, can get a boost in attendance.
Basically there is no other community in the USA that offer what Eugene offers...a huge experienced crew of volunteers*, strong local following, strong financial backing.
*The steeple height error at USA's had nothing to do with Eugene. Put that one on Doug Logan's crew.
Former Bulldog wrote:Track meets in Indy are a thing of the past. That track is gone.
Do you mean "gone" as it pertains to the deterioration of the track surface and facility, or is the IUPUI T&F venue literally not there anymore?
On the other side, I think about NCAA Baseball that has been played in Omaha since 1950 and the current contract has it there through 2035. It provides the same unique and big-time style that the U of O offers to Track and Field. College baseball has grown a lot over the last 15 years and has become "mainstream."
Jumbo Shrimp wrote:
dead most days accept the finals.
"except"