First off, my apologies for the mix up on who wrote the headline. To be honest, it was kind of just a shot in the dark. Figured I had a 50/50 shot.
But guys, I am really thinking you are going off on some tangents here. There are many points I feel I need to address.
First off, WEJO, when you say that "complaining about the issue won't do anything", I couldn't disagree more. What are we supposed to do? Keep getting screwed over while we work our asses off? Based on the comments you shared, the issue obviously needs to be brought to people's attention because there are a lot of misconceptions.
ROJO: I appreciate your comments. I get what you were saying about being contrary toward the "if only" retorts. I get that runners aren't going to be paid on the same level as Lebron or Tiger, but that wasn't really the point I was trying to counter either. I was trying to make the point that although it might not make Nick Symmonds go from making $100,000 (hypothetically speaking) to $1,000,000, it DOES make a difference to a lot of runners either emerging or going through a rough patch. Furthermore, in terms of your approximations of how much money the USATF has to work with, I never addressed the issue of whether or not they should be giving more money to athletes. I was mainly addressing how the ability to advertise more than one sponsor on a uniform could open up opportunities to many athletes (contrary to what WEJO states). It's not a matter of USATF giving more money, it's a matter of them loosening the uniform restrictions.
WEJO: I guess our views on a "struggling" athlete differ. I will use ONE example that I witnessed first hand. In my last race at the U.S. 10 mile champs, I roomed with a runner named Ryan Vail. Very talented runner who has shown that he has what it takes to run on an international level. The night before the race we had uniform checks. Every U.S. championship race I've been in this year has checked for USATF uniform regulations. Ryan was told that his Brooks symbol was too large and that he must cover it up with his racing bib. Now, whether or not you think Ryan is one of those struggling runners is up to you. However, I am pretty damn sure that $10,000 would make a pretty big impact on his standard of living. Not to mention, if I ran the 5k, 8k, 10k, 15k, 20k, 25k, half, and marathon champs, that is 8 different races where I am affected by the ruling. Not to mention the London marathon and New York City half marathon I ran. Now, I consider myself a "struggling athlete", and I know many other athletes in the same boat as me would consider themselves to be as well. Also, note how I said track athletes. This goes well beyond road racing. Many pole vaulters, jumpers, throwers, and sprinters could benefit from looser regulations, too. Rather than saying it affects the "marginal" athlete 1-2 times a year, how about reversing that. I think the marginal athlete is getting paid $50,000 to compete in a race by the race director.
Your comment about the race directors getting less money from big time sponsors, in my opinion, is a bit of a stretch. As I have mentioned before, many of these corporations don't the know IAFF or USATF regulations on uniforms, and therefore I suspect they would not even notice if an athlete has more sponsors on his/her uniform. You think they know that a Saucony athlete can only have a symbol on their uniform X*X inches? They are paying for the finish line banner, the bib space, the pamphlet space, etc.
Lastly, as the previous poster noted, there has been change in uniform policy. In the last U.S. Cross Country Championship my brother competed in, he was racing in a Saucony uniform, and under that was an advertisement for EAS. This would not be allowed anymore. Allowing more sponsors on a uniform helps the athlete/sponsor relationship. If an athlete can say "yes, i can put your symbol on my jersey", then the company is going to be more loyal to the athlete and feel as though they are representing them the best they can. In return, this could allow for longer lasting sponsorships, rather than the often fleeting deals that track athletes come across.
Point is, a lot of athletes do have a game plan, and I think the more exposure the issue gets, the better the odds are of people speaking up and something being done about it. I think that a change in the regulations would only help our sport grow and develop. You should check out the track and field athletes association at trackandfieldathletesassociation.org The convention is next month, and I think that the only way USATF will address the issue is if enough athletes speak up about it.