Jeff Wigand wrote:
Whose fault is it that Ryan Hall gets more attention than Meb?
NOW we're getting somewhere. I'm glad you asked this.
- Both have won a trials marathon.
- Since trials in 2007, Hall has NEVER WON ANOTHER MARATHON. You know that, right?
- Hall has time-trialled well in London (although 2:06:anything means fairly little on the world stage right now) and ran a massively aided time in Boston last year.
- Meb has won NYCM, which is close to Boston or greater in terms of domestic and global prestige.
- Meb has an Olympic silver, which is basically the currency of recognition for track athletes in the lay population (non-runners and recreational runners).
Back to your (very interesting) question: whose fault is that Hall gets more attention? Let's see: Asics was willing to sponsor Hall in 2005, the year he won NCAAs in, what 13:2x? He was impressive then, and since has done some amazing things, certainly had some down times, though. But his sponsor has stuck with him through the highs and lows that are INEVITABLE IN LONG-DISTANCE RUNNING. This in spite of the fact that his non-aided marathon and half-marathon PRS are now 4 and 5 years old.
Nike dropped Meb when he was actually running BETTER than his NYCM win - he basically tied his PR in Boston, then broke it the next year at NYCM, all to get dropped. (Your mumbling about his "age" or "injury trouble" ignore the simple fact that he is clearly still improving.)
If Nike is unable to market a runner with an Olympic medal and an NYCM win, who is still running PRs, that is pretty bad for a marketing department.
So, whose fault do you think it is? Meb's, for winning races and setting PRs at 36? I would really like to know your answer to this question. Clown.