Where are the Fans at Sacramento?

I was thinking the same. This cannot be good for t&f in the US, especially for distance running. At least it'll be back in Eugene next year.

Watching it for free on the internet? Why should I drive 2 hours from the Bay Area to sit in 90 heat when I can get a better view on my couch? Also, turning around the sprints and hurdles screw all the people that bought the most expensive seats. Just saying.

I was there yesterday and the day before. West stands were pretty backed for the 100. The second the 5k or 10k came up about 70% of the people left. There's also a lot of people just standing around the entrance area and foot stands not in the stands. The media did a good job covering the event but outside of that this was a disaster. Keep it in Eugene and try a big city next time. None of this Sacramento or Des Moines bs.

Just Bewhildered wrote:

I've been watching the USATF championships (on live streaming and on TV) now for three days and it looks like the entire East Grandstand is all but empty. The West stands look to be about half full, but most of those fans leave before distance races. It looks like, as many predicted, this is a disaster for Sacramento. No wonder Eugene gets to host many of these meets. At least they have a legit fan base that shows up for all the days and all the events.

Why should the fans give two sh*ts about this meet if the pros don't? If one of our best runners is going to skip a national championship race he has run the past 3 years so he can rest up to run in France in a meet that no one can watch why should they show up? It's not just Rupp there are plenty of other big names not competing in events but I don't like him so I'm calling him out.

Didn't he just run the 10k and win his 6th championship? Why does he need to run the 5k too?

If other runners can't attract a crowd, that is not Rupp's problem.

This guy is the greatest American distance runner of this era and he is balancing his plans for the next few years with his plans to be a father of twins very soon. But you don't like him so you are calling him out? Calling him out for what? Pathetic.

DaveW wrote:

Didn't he just run the 10k and win his 6th championship? Why does he need to run the 5k too?

If other runners can't attract a crowd, that is not Rupp's problem.

This guy is the greatest American distance runner of this era and he is balancing his plans for the next few years with his plans to be a father of twins very soon. But you don't like him so you are calling him out? Calling him out for what? Pathetic.

He's run it the last 3 years. Being there another few days changes anything about his preparation for being a father or his plans for the next few years? Really? HE SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED PARIS! To Rupp Paris > US Championship. Thats the truly pathetic thing and everything that is wrong with our sport. How do you explain that to a casual fan or observer? How do you gain or maintain fans with that attitude? "Umm yeah one of the best runners didnt show up to win a national championship because running a fast time in a foreign country means more"

I'm really adamant and feel strongly about this, nothing you say will change my mind, I figure nothing I say will change yours. I'm not going to respond anymore on the subject.

Considering everything Sacto was saying about being the other Track Town and wanting the 2017 USATFs to pick the Worlds team, this isn't looking good.

Dennis Reynolds 2.0 wrote:

[quote]DaveW wrote:

I'm really adamant and feel strongly about this, nothing you say will change my mind, I figure nothing I say will change yours. I'm not going to respond anymore on the subject.

This is what makes Americans great. We aren't shy about our closed mindedness. Shout it loud and proud my brother!

Maybe you don't understand the fact that he actually showed up at the US Nationals and won the 10k for the 6th time?

The fact that he has run "it" in the last 3 years is a further example that he has always supported the USA and will continue to do so for many years .... but he will decide what races to run.

I'm surprised that you didn't deride him for not running the 800 also.

I agree that you should not respond anymore on the subject of Galen Rupp.

Yanqui wrote:

Considering everything Sacto was saying about being the other Track Town and wanting the 2017 USATFs to pick the Worlds team, this isn't looking good.

I was thinking the same thing. This can't help them going forward. Especially after the big talking that went on just before it started.

A half empty Hornet Stadium is a full Hayward Field (22,000 vs. 10,500).

Yes, let's see what the final attendance figures turn out to be.

And the fair comparison is with other venues that have hosted champs in "off" years. It just isn't the same as a Worlds qualifying meet and certainly not an Olympic Trials.

2010 - Des Moines

2006 - Indianapolis

2002 - Palo Alto

1998 - New Orleans

Eugene hasn't hosted an "off" year meet in a very long time, so there is no direct comparison available.

As if there wasn't enough in fighting in this sport between:

1: Running Shoe companies

2. Running apparel companies

3. Running training groups

4. Running websites

5. Running publications

Now we have it between running venues. Pathetic.

casual fan wrote:

A half empty Hornet Stadium is a full Hayward Field (22,000 vs. 10,500).

Didn't know that. It's a hell of a point.

I know it is a smaller stadium but Indy always is packed for every track National Championship.

casual fan wrote:

A half empty Hornet Stadium is a full Hayward Field (22,000 vs. 10,500).

I'm sure you are fudging numbers to try and prove a point but seriously? How then do they fit in over 20k a day at Hayward? They've always added temp seating so you really can't exclude that. See below for some education:

And yes I know they probably have slightly lower attendance when not an Olympic trials but acting like they are capped at 10k is uninformed.

DaveW wrote:

As if there wasn't enough in fighting in this sport between:

1: Running Shoe companies

2. Running apparel companies

3. Running training groups

4. Running websites

5. Running publications

Now we have it between running venues. Pathetic.

Competition among running venues could be a good thing if it were among venues of those competing to, say, host the Super Bowl. The pathetic part here is that the three current competitors - Drake, Sac St and Hayward - are all in 2nd-3rd tier cities and host the meet in small venues. Of the three I see Hayward as having the advantage of looking great on TV.

I've never been to any of them in person, but I find Drake ugly on TV [and watching people sitting in uncomfortable-looking bleachers with no shade in sight in Central Iowa in June is just sad] and Sac St kind of passable but nothing special. On the other hand, every time I see Hayward on TV, I think, "Man, one of these days I really have to attend a meet there" and I think that's one of the effects you want a meet venue to have on TV/web spectators.

p.s. I see that the wikipedia article on Hayward lists the seating capacity as "10,500 (expandable 21,000)" - anyone with first-hand knowledge of both Sac St and Hayward care to comment on how Hayward in its expanded set up compares to Sac St?

George Atlas wrote:

I know it is a smaller stadium but Indy always is packed for every track National Championship.

Through the wonder of the internet, I can report that, in 2006, Indy drew 34,000 folks total over four days to a stadium that holds 12,000.

This was almost the same as Des Moines 2010, where 33,000 showed up for the four days, capacity 14,000.

From discussion at Track and Field News, the last previous nationals in Indy before 2006 was 1997 and the attendance was very bad.

However, from the same discussion, when Indy hosted meets in the 1980s, attendance was in fact fabulous.