Super Bowl/NFL location vs USATF/XC location

Runners are hardcore, football players aren't.

Spokane in February is a lot easier on the USATF budget than Miami.

Noone will ever convince me that NCAA can't do better than Terre Haute, Indiana, on a Monday afternoon. I get pissed everytime I even think about it.

IAAF XC Champs 2007 Mombasa is the largest XC race ever held. They had 100,000 fans squeezed in packing every part of the course, stands, roads,... Mombasa is a warm, coastal tourist city. You would think people would take a lesson, at least a hint. But no, they keep holding XC champs in dead towns in the winter like Spokane, Terre Haute, Bronx, Boston. The only XC race in recent memory that has come close to the success of IAAF Mombasa was USAs in San Diego few years back, and 2009 PAC-10 Champs held at Long Beach Airport. Actually it was held the golf course which shares the same exact traffic signal as Long Beach Airport. Thus the 2009 PAC-10 XC race was packed with fans that simply flew in for the day trip, sans rental car, sans hotel. Oh well, but, who cares about the fans ?

Boulder was crowded wasn't it? You need to go where the fans are.

Just Thinkin Sum... wrote:

I wuz thinkin sum... and was a wunnderin... the NFL always has the Super Bowl at a sunny tourist spot or at a place with an indoor stadium. While USATF has XC champs in the coldest non-tourist towns at the most rotten time of the year for tourists like now. Ever think about that ?

People like football. Nobody Cares about XC, ever think about that.

The worst seats in the stadium for the Super Bowl are going for a reduced price of $1200 a piece. They sell out.

Do you think you could get people to pay 50, 40, 20 or even 10 dollars, and have them travel across the country in droves to watch a XC race? I think not.

Where do people get off comparing a niche sport to the most watched sporting event in the world?

Budget will always come first. San Diego Sports Commission must have thrown cash at USATF to make SD feasible.

NCAA nationals have been that Monday since 1946. It's far from ideal, but other days are worse.

USAs at Boulder wasn't crowded.

No it was not wrote:

USAs at Boulder wasn't crowded.

Thank you for the honesty and not a response based on a delusional superiority complex

Give Me A Break wrote:

Where do people get off comparing a niche sport to the most watched sporting event in the world?

I agree with most of your post, but no one compared XC to the World Cup Final. Unless we've just given up on any attempt at humility and we are now openly referring to the United State as "the world" now.

Bear of Bad News wrote:

Give Me A Break wrote:

Where do people get off comparing a niche sport to the most watched sporting event in the world?

I agree with most of your post, but no one compared XC to the World Cup Final. Unless we've just given up on any attempt at humility and we are now openly referring to the United State as "the world" now.

OK, let's split hairs. The most watched sporting event in the world 3 out of every four years using figures from the top 57 markets which represent over 90% of the television viewing public.

Just Thinkin Sum... wrote:

I wuz thinkin sum... and was a wunnderin... the NFL always has the Super Bowl at a sunny tourist spot or at a place with an indoor stadium. While USATF has XC champs in the coldest non-tourist towns at the most rotten time of the year for tourists like now. Ever think about that ?

Clubs/Associations bid for XC nationals and USATF assesses the bids. It's not like USATF can just pick whatever venue they feel like. There needs to be a sponsoring club that can host the event.

I thought Montgomery County Road Runners did a pretty good job last year. Interesting thing is that if the Derwood, Maryland site had been this year (it was a year ago this very weekend), it would not have happened. They got 2 feet of snow last night. I wonder what they would have done to reschedule and pick the team for worlds?

Boulder's USAXC was average for cold climate XC. Sim to Terre Haute, Boston, VOA, Rock Farm, Ft Vancouver. Boulder's USAXC was around I'd say 1/10th the Boulder Bolder crowd. So small the local paper reported that the police were NOT called for traffic control, the hotels/restaurants were NOT busy. Not huge like Houston, San Diego. Not massive droves of fans like IAAF XC in Eur.

I've been to the last five Club Cross championships and can't remember a single local newspaper article. SF being the only legitimate big city in the bunch. We're lucky that the local associations and clubs put together bids. Warming up in Spokane i was sure wishing some warm weather association would step up!

piedmontcat wrote:

Noone will ever convince me that NCAA can't do better than Terre Haute, Indiana, on a Monday afternoon. I get pissed everytime I even think about it.

+1

Sorry A-hole wrote:

Bear of Bad News wrote:

I agree with most of your post, but no one compared XC to the World Cup Final. Unless we've just given up on any attempt at humility and we are now openly referring to the United State as "the world" now.

OK, let's split hairs. The most watched sporting event in the world 3 out of every four years using figures from the top 57 markets which represent over 90% of the television viewing public.

They "get off" thinking there are positive aspects of one that could be successfully applied to the other.

XC Enthusiast wrote:

It's not like USATF can just pick whatever venue they feel like. There needs to be a sponsoring club that can host the event.

Well why the hell can't USATF dictate the venue, what's stopping them? So why hasn't the sport advanced beyond this rudimentary level? It's been stuck in this status quo for decades. This is probably a large part of why the public doesn't buy into it as a legitimate, professional sport. There are high school championships that enjoy a higher level of professionalism and polish than our pro level national championships do.

hardset nipples wrote:

XC Enthusiast wrote:

It's not like USATF can just pick whatever venue they feel like. There needs to be a sponsoring club that can host the event.

Well why the hell can't USATF dictate the venue, what's stopping them? So why hasn't the sport advanced beyond this rudimentary level? It's been stuck in this status quo for decades. This is probably a large part of why the public doesn't buy into it as a legitimate, professional sport. There are high school championships that enjoy a higher level of professionalism and polish than our pro level national championships do.

First of all, I've been to plenty of HS XC state championships. Almost the entire crowd are relatives of the runners who live nearby. And depending on the state, the fields are usually larger than USAXC fields.

Second, USATF is a staff that works on a budget. Sure, they could fly into a city and set up a cross country race on their own. But it would cost them a lot more to do that than to have a local club handle the site, interface with local authorities, etc... It's sort of the same idea as the U.S. Open in golf. The USGA owns the championship, but clubs bid for it and front a lot of the cost.

People are living a pipe dream if they think the USATF could come up with some magic advertising scheme to make USA XC championships popular with average Americans. Maybe NYRR hosted it in Central Park one year at least there would be some passersby curious enough to take a look for a few minutes.

So?

They also waste a crapload of dough on junkets for officials and staff. USATF could wield much more power in the decision-making process than they have been. They just choose not to.

And people are delusional defeatists if they think that USATF is really, functionally doing all they can to market a professional sport. You say it can't be done? STFU and sit down and let people with vision push this sport to higher levels.