Why do you have to be Deena or Meb to make any money in this sport?

Are you paying?

....do you have to be Deena or Meb to make any money in this sport?

_____________________________________

Yes, or kenyan.

Ghost of Adam Smith wrote:

Are you paying?

exactly. why should anyone pay them? if running were worth anything, then runners would get paid.

the better question is--why the hell do baseball, basketbal, and football players get paid so much? Here's the answer: people are suckers. we'll spend $200 to get tickets to some stupid sports contest. Then we'll turn around and by shoes like those worn by our favorite thug/basketball player. Then those players (who love to bitch and cry about how they are from the ghetto) go blow the money they make off of us on 14 cars each and a bunch of f'ing jewelry. heaven forbid they help the kids who are still stuck in the ghetto. and don't give me any examples of the exceptional players who actually give back--they are few and far between.

anyway, that went off on a tangent for awhile. the point is, if you think runners should get paid, then start donating to the cause. if you don't want to pay them, then quit whining because nobody else should have to pay them then, either.

there are much bigger problems to worry about in the world then paying someone to run.

I can name at least 15 american athletes that are making more than $60k a year to run that are not sponsored by Nike and another 15 that are sponsored by Nike.

It's the governing bodies funds. If there supporting something then as a cardholder i want to know who decides where the money is going. If it's a private company that's not my problem. People have to be accountable. If my governing body is giving money to support athletes i want a say who gets it. USA TRACK AND FIELD has a board. I pay dues and the only thing it gets me is insurance if my hand falls off or something. My forty min. 10k is not cutting it in San Francisco.

I remember when I was a the Rock and Roll Half in Virginia Beach and Deena beat all comers. They basically gave her no chance going in and she took all the Kenyans, the Ethiopians, all the favored runners.

She WAS the up and coming athlete and now she's getting slammed for getting some pay back? That's bogus.

In 1997 the RRCA gave Deena a pittance from their Roads Scholar program, but she got some recognition from someone, at least more than she'd gotten from USATF early in her career.

For sure, there needs to be more support but your post slams Deena and Meb for getting money WAY after they've done their time. They earned it.

Rusty Dusty is crazy.

There are NOT 10 total American distance runners who make over $60k in base salary - not even close!

if the USATF allowed runners to plaster themselves with ads like NASCAR, then there'd be a lot more money in running.

however, we're left at the mercy of the shoe companies. and there's only so much shoe money to go around.

change the uniform rule goddammit!

Runners don't make any money because running is boring to watch. I'm obsessed with running, and I still get bored sometimes watching running on TV. I know that a 2:06 marathon is obscenely fast, and the average person, even if they were fit, couldn't run a 1/4 mile at that pace, but the problem is those 2:06 guys look like they're jogging on TV. In distance running, you can't watch and expect to see awesome displays of athleticism, shattered backboards, fiery crashes, etc. You just get to see some runners slowly try to wear each other down. It's interesting if you have some personal connection to the sport, but I can see why the casual sports fan wouldn't be interested.

And if nobody outside of other runners is interested in the sport, how are you going to generate money to pay a bunch of athletes? Athletes don't get paid just because they deserve to be paid for being such great people. They get paid because somebody thinks that by paying them, they can in the long run use the athletes performance to generate even more money.

Clarence wrote:

... why not create an incentive structure that elites could work toward and if they accomplish that goal, then they are alloted a certain amount of funding. ... If we want more meb's and deena's we will have to offer incentives for young athletes!

Sounds great. Why don't you start on that tomorrow.How much should we give them? How much are you willing to pay?

I don't believe it has to be an individual. There are not many running martyr's out there, not many Kevin and Keith Hanson's that sacrifice personal income to support potential elite athletes. But I could point to USATF, who could easily establish an incentive program for out-of-college Americans who have shown potential/progress. If a young American shows progress (progress can be defined by consistent improvement in USA Championship races, also track and cross races- made a few world teams, improved on times and rankings, etc) then they should be rewarded with a small stipend, a stipend which increases gradually depending on the level of improved performances. This is not a crazy idea. It makes sense.

But of course USATF is not interested in non-Deena and non-Meb types because it's not in their best political interests.

Nike isn't interested either. Brooks was/is with Hanson's. But once again, it is a group, and not an individual.

It will take a company of sorts that cares about American distance running, who reaches out to the starved young elite runner who trains day and night but can't seem to dedicate enough of his/her time to make that next step into beating Dan Browne and Ryan Shay. There are no doubt a lot of kids out there that can run at this level who have to wait tables in order to fly to their next road race.

Why not set up a LET'S RUN.COM fund for young americans....

A lot of shoe companies, not just Brooks, have incentives for their athletes depending on their ability. Maybe Nike doesn't have it anymore, but I would be surprised if that were the case.

But anyway, I think people are looking at this the wrong way. If you want to be an elite runner you should want to get to your goals with or without outside monetary incentives. If you have to dangle fancy stipends in front of people's faces to get them to run a 3:40 1500m or 2:20 marathon what does that say about the athlete you are helping out? Chances are they will quit in a year or so when something better comes along. And it probably won't be running related. Guys in the 70s and 80s who would run 2:15 or 2:20 or whatnot did it because they loved it and didn't mind scratching a living with parttime jobs or whatnot. It probably made them tougher too. I'm not saying stipends are a bad thing, I think anything that can help a runner spend less time working is a good thing, but doubt whether this would actually change things significantly, especially since a lot of shoe companies, or Roads Scholars, have had this in place for the better part of a decade.

If your running career depended on getting in the door with Nike your running career wouldn't last long.

The love of the sport argument is absolutely absurd. You can love it all you'd like but if you can't eat you can't run. Incentives would only allow the sub-elite who has potential to be elite have a better opportunity to become an elite.

All I have to ask is: Do Kenyans run for the love of the sport...?

Clarence wrote:

Brooks was/is with Hanson's. But once again, it is a group, and not an individual.

I have had an opportunity to read a Hansons-Brooks contract on a visit. They receive Performance bonuses for nearly everything. Time-World Teams-Year end rankings-Places in major road races-Places in minor road races. Their top athletes are making over $50k a year and they aren't even Olympians.