Michael Johnson’s ideas for improving track & field

“Drive to Survive” F1 show bro!

*kidding

I agree that there needs to be more focus on storytelling and competition between the best athletes. I shared that feedback previously on this board with the folks organizing the LA meet.

I disagree that field events might need to be on the cutting block. Some of our sport’s best performers are in the field. With a better presentation, field events can be very exciting.

Here’s one idea: what if we have three field athletes make their attempts at the same time. Imagine three throwers shot putting at the same time side by side (with sufficient spacing in between them) and throwing in the same direction. We could see instantly and easily who threw the farthest. Same with long jumping. It could be bracket elimination style where the meet starts with 9 athletes split up into three groups, and an athlete needs to win their group to advance to the final round of 3. That could be riveting!

I'd like to know what he thinks is wrong with the Diamond League circuit. Too many meetings which makes each one get diluted?

First, to relate to MJ's point, they need to stop self-sabotaging by cutting between races/events and omitting parts of races.

My main concern is that the change from the DL winner being the one who amasses the most points over the season (with the final being double points and mandatory attendance to win the total) to whoever wins the final wins it all makes it so that the regular season meets matters very little outside of 1: possibility of fast times 2: outcomes of H2H matchups as indictative for coming championships meets later in the season. I feel like many of the popular sports has continuity over a season where every match/meet matters in some tangible way. You could definitely tweak the DL format but make every meet matter. Also, keep the WCs/Olympics as they are. Maybe this is an unpopular idea but I would prefer to see the country quota increased from 3 to maybe 4 or 5. If I watch the Olympics I want to be certain that I'm watching the absolute best at their absolute best, and not have to wonder what would happened if the former world champion who Kenya left off their team or the new super prodigy who fell at USA's were in the race.

Been to a 1000 track meets at all levels, the sport is fine as is.

I have never left any track meet dissatisfied, it's all good.

So many memories.....

It's pouring down rain, all us fans under cover but out on the track there stands Don Quarrie waving to come on lets go don't let a rain stop us......ha! That was at the Bakersfield Classic.

Speaking of Don Quarrie, now in Fresno. The 4x1 with Quarrie anchoring a club, former teammate Willie Deckard still at USC. Well Quarries team dropped the baton so at the final exchange its all USC, no not really because there goes Quarrie running stride for stride with Deckard, with a few yards to go Quarrie backs off. smiles all around.

You have some good ideas. However you might run into a real estate problem. Three long/triple jump runways, 3 shot, discus, hammer rings. Are you also suggesting 3 pole vault/javelin runways, plus three high jump venues? And all of this happening at once? Officials and volunteers will be getting injured/killed left and right. Like I said at the beginning, you have some good ideas. But you need to keep in mind how little space there already is for this three ringed circus we call Track and Field.

I appreciate Michael Johnson's perspective. Here's my two cents:

The argument for reimagining professional track and field as a private commercial entity is that it would allow for more focus on profitability, which is essential for the growth and sustainability of the sport. A commercial entity with a profit motive could conduct market research and employ deep sports business knowledge to create a product that appeals to fans, media, and sponsors, ultimately leading to increased revenue for athletes as compensation from the sport itself. The suggested changes to the sport, such as a limited number of events and the inclusion of only the best athletes, would simplify and streamline the sport, making it more accessible and easier to market and promote.

The argument against reimagining professional track and field as a private commercial entity is that it risks prioritizing profitability over the integrity of the sport. A commercial entity may be more interested in making money than in developing and promoting the sport for its own sake, potentially leading to a loss of tradition, diversity, and inclusivity. Moreover, the suggested changes to the sport, such as the exclusion of certain events and athletes, may not align with the values and interests of the broader track and field community, resulting in a loss of support and participation. Lastly, a commercial entity may not have the expertise or resources to govern and organize the sport, potentially leading to a lack of accountability and transparency.

Michael Johnson looked like a house in the 96 Olympics. I wonder if he was on some of that stuff that he complains track and field should vet for ? 🤔 he’s a toxic figure and a hypocrite in my eyes.

Yeah I agree, field events should be featured more, at least certain ones. World Athletics did their own survey on the most popular Track & Field events and the long jump, high jump and pole vault were in the top 5 most favorite events by track fans ahead of the 200m and 400m. This was the same survey that was used to justify the removal of the 5,000m and 10,000m runs from the Diamond League btw.

The fans we already have are literally telling us what they want to see, and somehow we continue to fail to give it to them. Who can run the fastest (100m), who can jump the farthest and who can jump the highest; that's the formula for a winning track meet people want to watch.

athleticsweekly.com

Triple jump and 200m cut from 2020 Diamond League - AW

The 3000m steeplechase and discus will also not feature in the Diamond League Final next year

Link:athleticsweekly.com/athletics-news/tri...

Track and Field is what is. It’s not going to compete with the major sports no matter what. Just let it be MJ.

I disagree. Claiming that Track and Field is not going to compete with major sports no matter what is not entirely accurate. Sure, it's true that Track and Field may not have the same level of mainstream popularity as sports like football or basketball, but there is evidence to suggest that it can still draw significant interest and attention.

Evidence, you say? Yep, according to World Athletics, the 2019 World Athletics Championships in Doha drew a total of 1.27 billion broadcast audience impressions worldwide. This indicates that there is a significant audience for Track and Field events, both in person and through media coverage.

Furthermore, high-profile Track and Field events such as the Olympics and the Diamond League attract widespread attention and generate significant revenue. In fact, according to a report by the Sports Business Journal, the Diamond League generated more than $30 million in revenue in 2019.

Overall, while it may not have the same level of mainstream popularity as some major sports, Track and Field has proven to be a compelling and enduring sport that can still draw significant interest and attention.

I like the idea of marketing it as a three ring circus, with the fastest runners, highest/farthest jumpers and farthest throwers. Just keep repeating how amazing the athletes are, and how fierce the competition is to finish at the top.

Any suggestion that doesn’t include axing the triple jump is not serious enough

I love the idea of four majors a year, and they don't have to be the same location, let different cities bid for hosting one of the four, with the World Championships or Olympics as the fourth. The first three can produce extra qualifiers for the WC/Oly., for example if you win two of the first three races, you qualify for the Olympics, and your country gets one extra qualifier.

Give it a name like "World Apex Athletics" to show that these are the best in the world, unlike our "World Series" that is just two teams from one country (or the Blue Jays).

I don't agree with the assertion that "first you get the fans, then you get media and sponsors." Every other sport did it the other way around: first they got the civic boosters on board, who got the media on board, then they pushed that narrative for 50 years or more, then it became a cultural mainstay, then it grew into a billion dollar spectacle.

Also track and field already is a cultural mainstay, it is the largest sport in U.S. high schools. So it does have the fans, they are just untapped. The goal should be finding a way into the gigantic potential fan base that is already there, and Johnson has some good suggestions on how to get there.

If a track meet is a three ring circus, the triple jump is the two-headed cow. You don't want to see it, but you can't look away.

I like the idea of top athletes having a schedule of races they must adhere to.

Have a points system to qualify for worlds. But have a bye to the finals for the top three performers on the year, so there is an incentive to run fast, not just win.

National Championships will be part of their schedule.

Provide a schedule for the fans at the beginning of the season, so they can look forward to matchups as the season progresses.

Johnson wants a quality product, but track and field is already a quality sport, it just needs to be packaged better.

That is one reason I am highly critical of track and field announcers, especially those who don't put much emotion into it. Every track race is high intensity, the strain and the effort is visible in every athlete, but the announcers don't often bring that out. I compare it to football announcers who get really excited when a player makes a first down and they go nuts for a touchdown. Every track finish should be the level of a touchdown, with any runner making a mid-race move being the level of a first down. Even baseball announcers, who talk for hours at a time, get really excited when someone gets a hit or a strikeout. Track announcers don't even match that much of the time.

To promote the sport, announcers need to highlight the intensity of the athletes, bring out the athleticism and the competitive nature of every event. That's just the start, the entire production needs to show that these are the top athletes who have reached levels that very few people can attain.

This is such a dumb mentality, we know its not going to be as big as Basketball. But the current state of the sport is a mess. Stars don't compete against each other, there is no real centralized competition structure, you need 5 different streaming services to watch races, they cut to commercials mid-race, the majority of pro runners live slightly above the poverty line. How can people see this and not want better for the sport?

Horse racing and F1 are both multi-billion dollar businesses and I see zero reason we can't reach at least some fraction of that. So many other individual sports have carved their own niches and T&F is somehow worse than it was 30 years ago