I love how the rumors on this board turn out to be true.
My thoughts 1) Good luck. More pro groups in the US and more shoe companies involved is a good thing.
2) Hadn't thought much about the athletes they'd have besides Knight, but right now the roster is thin. But some of the top, top groups aren't that big historically.
3) WTF With the name. It's the Reebok Boston Track Club but they're going to be mainly out of Virginia? Clearly, I'm not a marketing genius. But I just chuckled when I read that.
4) Totally agree with the comment by Paul Astorino who will oversee the group for Reebok who said they need to make superior product for this to really work. I ran track one year at the University of Texas and Reebok was the sponsor. The product wasn't very good and some of the guys wouldn't train in the free shoes. That was 20 years ago. Reebok hasn't really shown a commitment to running since but clearly they have the resources to make good running shoes. Nike is a marketing genius, and sponsors groups, but they also make good running shoes. The best have good product and good marketing.
5) Top training groups do resonate with the public. Look what Brooks did with the Brooks Beast etc. (Correction: I was thinking of the Brooks Hansons teams) Brooks used to be regarded as not making good running shoes either. They improved their product and showed people at the top end of the sport they were serious with the Beasts and other measures.
6) I had no idea Garrett O'Toole's dad was so high up at Reebok. Sounds like the light went off when he saw what Hoka was doing.
7) I knew his Garrett O'Toole's was Jason Garrett, coach of the Cowboys. Go COWBOYS.
wejo wrote:
6) I had no idea Garrett O'Toole's dad was so high up at Reebok. Sounds like the light went off when he saw what Hoka was doing.
wejo wrote:
3) WTF With the name. It's the Reebok Boston Track Club but they're going to be mainly out of Virginia? Clearly, I'm not a marketing genius. But I just chuckled when I read that.
So, this is not a group designed to develop american talent obviously? Top two guys are a Canadian and a Jamaican. A little different than the Hoka/NJ group.
Reebok founded the Enclave the same way Brooks founded Hansons.
Don't trust Reebok. They never follow through with their support of professional running. Several years ago, they dropped a number of good runners (Kim Smith was one of them) to "go in a different direction." They follow fads (Crossfit), then drop them.
I give the team a year before Reebok pulls out.
Hopefully wojo/rojo and the rest of you nitwits buy some Reebok gear; time to take off the nykie. I read Rojo’s piece and all I could think of was ..buy the products if you like them, the coach, the athletes they sign.
Also, why do all these teams base themselves in expensive urban areas or hip, expensive college towns? Have we not learned anything from the East Africans? Pick some cheap, sleepy mountain town in the Southwest with minimal distractions and be based there. Just make sure there is a track and plenty of decent trails to train on. What else do you need, really?
wejo wrote:
My thoughts 1) Good luck. More pro groups in the US and more shoe companies involved is a good thing.
2) Hadn't thought much about the athletes they'd have besides Knight, but right now the roster is thin. But some of the top, top groups aren't that big historically.
3) WTF With the name. It's the Reebok Boston Track Club but they're going to be mainly out of Virginia? Clearly, I'm not a marketing genius. But I just chuckled when I read that.
4) Totally agree with the comment by Paul Astorino who will oversee the group for Reebok who said they need to make superior product for this to really work. I ran track one year at the University of Texas and Reebok was the sponsor. The product wasn't very good and some of the guys wouldn't train in the free shoes. That was 20 years ago. Reebok hasn't really shown a commitment to running since but clearly they have the resources to make good running shoes. Nike is a marketing genius, and sponsors groups, but they also make good running shoes. The best have good product and good marketing.
5) Top training groups do resonate with the public. Look what Brooks did with the Brooks Beast etc. Brooks used to be regarded as not making good running shoes either. They improved their product and showed people at the top end of the sport they were serious with the Beasts and other measures.
6) I had no idea Garrett O'Toole's dad was so high up at Reebok. Sounds like the light went off when he saw what Hoka was doing.
7) I knew his Garrett O'Toole's was Jason Garrett, coach of the Cowboys. Go COWBOYS.
Hope Reebok stays with this long term. They definitely are showing commitment to the sport here, but they have a habit (other than with zap) of sponsoring athletes and groups for a few years and then adopting a more casual focused branding again and dropping them.
Dont be stupid wrote:
Nobody was buying Brooks shoes because the of the Brooks Beast Team, the shoes got better because they hired good developers and and product managers. Please understand the business before you comment.
Reebok had other issues that led to their demise and a lack of leadership to keep the running program running.
Running shoe sales fund the money spent into the program. If your not selling shoes then no program.
Paul A. knows what to do and will help guide this program in the right direction. Paul knows shoes as well and they will be runable.
As far as product...yes.
Different angle though...start with a good xc spike/flat. Said this many times over years (to Fila with Goucher for example). Cheap. No worry about stability bs and what or drop nowadays. Not event specific like track. Put some marketing recognition behind it. F-M hordes of kids would not dig a Knyght spike? Jeez, door is open. Victory xc was a hightop last year...
Not going to solve all problems for a company but easier than a traditional running shoe line or knocking off other brands good or gimmicky ideas. Or renaming your own TPU midsole.
With modest success with the xc shoe kids will be more inclined to try a trainer. Call it Aztrek or something. 100 bucks. Put a heel counter on it and a durable outsole.
Grote
Y'all are forgetting Martin Hehir is really one of the best potential distance talents in the US. He is in med school, but with some more consistent training could really be a legit threat at longer distances.
Finished second in the loaded Philly 1/2 last fall with very minimal training.
wejo wrote:
6) I had no idea Garrett O'Toole's dad was so high up at Reebok. Sounds like the light went off when he saw what Hoka was doing.
I wonder how much thought went into the location? Having trained in Charlottesville, it’s not the ideal trainging location. Temperate, but most of the runs are super hilly and you have to drive 45 mins to dirt roads. Forget training there in the summer if you’re not over in Europe. Humid AF. Why not base in Boston, but spend significant time at altitude?
Also, Hehir will have to decide if he wants to take time off during Med school after his 2nd year, because the next two years are not at all conducive to training. I suppose it could be done, but it’s like going from a stay at home job to 40-60 hour a week in the hospital.
If you love gimmicky,
They should go with
Reebok
Athletic
Club
East
RACE get it. ha ha ha ha ha
Always encouraging to see news like this but....these groups are NEVER sustainable due to the fact that their existence (and all group's existence) is entirely reliant on the commercial whims of the running shoe brands and the industry in general.
If the sport wants to be something, there needs to be a self-sustaining model for clubs across the board that isn't dependent in this way.
I wish the running community would tap into the great thinkers that are in the sport to re-imagine how the economics could work better.
thisguy wrote:
I wonder how much thought went into the location? Having trained in Charlottesville, it’s not the ideal trainging location. Temperate, but most of the runs are super hilly and you have to drive 45 mins to dirt roads. Forget training there in the summer if you’re not over in Europe. Humid AF. Why not base in Boston, but spend significant time at altitude?
